LAWS(DLH)-1999-9-60

HARINDER SINGH Vs. STATE

Decided On September 09, 1999
HARINDER SINGH Appellant
V/S
STATE OF DELHI Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioners 2 & 3 are the parents while petitioner No. 4 is the sister of petitioner No. 1. All of them have jointly filed the present petition under Section 482, Cr.P.C. alleging that petitioner No. 1 was married to respondent No. 2 on 30th November, 1987 and unfortunately disputes arose between them since the inception of marriage itself. Pursuant to a settlement (copy annexure `A'), marriage in between petitioner No. 1 and respondent No. 2 was dissolved by a decree of divorce by mutual consent by the order dated 20th March, 1998 and a sum of Rs. 1,50,000.00 was paid in cash by petitioner No. 1 to respondent No. 2 towards all her claims. Based on FIR No. 577/94 lodged by respondent No. 2, criminal proceedings under Sections 406/498-A, Indian Penal Code are pending against the petitioners before Ms. Swaran Kanta Mehra, M.M. In the statement made in divorce proceedings, the respondent No. 2 had undertaken not to pursue the said criminal proceedings. It is prayed that the pending criminal proceedings - State Vs. Harinder Singh & Ors. flowing from said FIR No. 577/94 under Sections 406/498-A, Indian Penal Code P.S. Malviya Nagar, may be quashed.

(2.) Respondent No. 2 has contested the petition by filing reply. It is not disputed that marriage in between petitioner No. 1 and respondent No. 2 was dissolved by a decree of divorce by mutual consent by the order dated 20th March, 1998. However, it is alleged that the amount of Rs. 1,50,000.00 was paid by petitioner No. 1 for getting the divorce and not for escaping from punishment for the offences committed by petitioners for which FIR No. 577/94 was lodged. It is further stated that petitioner No. 1 is guilty of not closing the cases lodged by him against respondent No. 2 and others including the case for custody of the child namely Guneet Singh, as agreed.

(3.) I have heard the petitioners who have argued in person Ms. Neelam Grover for the State and Sh. P.N. Mishra, Sr. Advocate appearing for respondent No. 2 and have also been taken through the record.