Subhash Chand Dhiman & Ors. v. The State (NCT of Delhi)
Case at a glance
Outcome
Disposed of
The petition is disposed of
Provisions considered
- Hindu Marriage Act, 1955
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 ss. 34, 406, 498A
Key paragraphs
- Para 33. Whether the judgment should be reported in YES NO NO the Digest? ANIL KUMAR, J. * Petitioner No.1 and petitioner No.5, husband and wife, are present with their counsel. Learned counsel for the parties contend that the disputes between the petitioner No.5 and petitioner…
Judgment
Through Mr.B.K. Singla, Advocate for petitioners No.1 to 4 along with petitioner No.1 in person. Mr.Om Sharma, Advocate for petitioner No.5 along with petitioner No.5 in person. Versus The State (NCT of Delhi) …. Respondent Through Mr.R.N. Vats, APP for the State along with W/SI Asha Sinha, P.S. R.K. Puram. CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR
Whether reporters of Local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? To be referred to the reporter or not?
Operative part
Whether the judgment should be reported in YES NO NO the Digest? ANIL KUMAR, J. * Petitioner No.1 and petitioner No.5, husband and wife, are present with their counsel. Learned counsel for the parties contend that the disputes between the petitioner No.5 and petitioner No.1 have been resolved. The marriage between the petitioner No.1 and petitioner No.5 has already been dissolved by a decree of divorce dated 14th Crl.M.C. No.2612/2008 September, 2007 on the ground of mutual consent under Section 13 B (2) of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. Learned counsel also contend that under the settlement between the parties, petitioner No.5 was entitled for an amount of Rs.31,000/- which amount has already been paid to her. It is contended that in the circumstance no useful purpose shall be served in continuing with the proceedings pursuant to FIR No.43/2007 under Sections 498A/406/34 of Indian Penal Code registered at Police Station R.K. Puram against petitioners No.1 to 4. Let the statement of petitioner No.5/complainant be recorded who is identified by her counsel, Mr.Om Sharma, Advocate. Statement of petitioner No.5 has been recorded. The petitioner No.5 has stated that she has settled the disputes on her own free will and without any undue pressure and she has already received the settled amount and her marriage with petitioner No.1 has already been dissolved by a decree of divorce dated 14th September, 2007 on the ground of mutual consent under Section 13 B (2) of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. In the circumstances, it is apparent that no useful purpose shall be served in continuing with the proceedings pursuant to FIR No.43/2007 under Sections 498A/406/34 of Indian Penal Code registered at Police Station R.K. Puram against petitioners No.1 to 4. It is also apparent that it shall be in the interest of justice that the said FIR and all the proceedings emanating therefrom against petitioners No.1 to 4 are quashed. Crl.M.C. No.2612/2008 Consequently, in the totality of facts and circumstances, FIR No.43/2007 under Sections 498A/406/34 of Indian Penal Code registered at Police Station R.K. Puram and all the proceedings emanating therefrom are quashed against petitioners No.1 to 4. The petition is disposed of. Dasti. August 12, 2008 ‘Dev’ ANIL KUMAR, J. Crl.M.C. No.2612/2008
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: The petition is disposed of
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955; Indian Penal Code, 1860 — ss. 34, 406, 498A.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Delhi High Court, on 12 Aug 2008. The bench was ANIL KUMAR.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.