Ravi Sharma vs.state & Anr

Ravi Sharma vs State & Anr

Type Court Judgment Court Delhi Decided Jul 30, 2018

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1216549

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1216549
Court: Delhi High Court
Decided On: Jul 30, 2018
Subject: Land Acquisition

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Land Acquisition

Key legal issue: Land Acquisition

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Ravi Sharma

Respondent

State & Anr

Excerpt

.....counsels for the parties submit that the parties have settled their disputes and reconciled their differences.... petitioner no.1 and crl.m.c. 3756/2018 page 1 of 2 respondent no.2/complainant have started residing together amicably.3. respondent no.2 who is present in court in person and is identified by the investigating officer. she confirms that she is living together with the petitioner happily and has no complaint against the petitioner. respondent no.2 further submits that she has settled the dispute with the petitioners and is agreeable to the settlement and does not wish to press the criminal charges against the petitioners any further.4. in view of the fact that the disputes between the petitioners and respondent no.2 emanate out of a matrimonial discord and have been settled and they have started living together, continuation of criminal proceedings will be an exercise in futility and justice in the case demands that the dispute between the parties is put to an end and peace is restored; securing the ends of justice being the ultimate guiding factor. it would be expedient to quash the subject fir and the consequent proceedings emanating therefrom.5. in view of the above, the petition is allowed. fir no.496 of 2016 under sections 506/509/498a/3of the ipc read with section 4 of dowry prohibition act police station sultan puri, new delhi and the consequent proceedings emanating there from are, accordingly quashed.6. order dasti under signatures of the court master. july30 2018 ‘rs’ crl.m.c. 3756/2018 sanjeev sachdeva, j page 2 of 2

Full Judgment

$~81 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + CRL.M.C. 3756/2018 & Crl. M.A. 28820/2018 Judgment delivered on:

30. 07.2018 RAVI SHARMA STATE & ANR versus ........ Petitioner

........ RESPONDENTS

Advocates who appeared in this case: Mr. P.N. Sharma & Mr. Tanuj Sharma, Advocate . For the... Petitioner

: For the Respondent: CORAM:-

"HON’BLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA Mr. Raghuvinder Verma, Addl. PP for the State with SI Ramesh Kumar JUDGMENT3007.2018 SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.

(ORAL) 1. The petitioner seeks quashing of FIR No.496 of 2016 under Sections 506/509/498A/3
of the IPC read with Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act Police Station Sultan Puri, New Delhi, based on a settlement. It is contended that the FIR was lodged consequent to a matrimonial discord.

2. Learned counsels for the parties submit that the parties have settled their disputes and reconciled their differences.... Petitioner

No.1 and CRL.M.C. 3756/2018 Page 1 of 2 respondent No.2/complainant have started residing together amicably.

3. Respondent No.2 who is present in court in person and is identified by the Investigating Officer. She confirms that she is living together with the petitioner happily and has no complaint against the petitioner. Respondent No.2 further submits that she has settled the dispute with the petitioners and is agreeable to the settlement and does not wish to press the criminal charges against the petitioners any further.

4. In view of the fact that the disputes between the petitioners and respondent No.2 emanate out of a matrimonial discord and have been settled and they have started living together, continuation of criminal proceedings will be an exercise in futility and justice in the case demands that the dispute between the parties is put to an end and peace is restored; securing the ends of justice being the ultimate guiding factor. It would be expedient to quash the subject FIR and the consequent proceedings emanating therefrom.

5. In view of the above, the petition is allowed. FIR No.496 of 2016 under Sections 506/509/498A/3
of the IPC read with Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act Police Station Sultan Puri, New Delhi and the consequent proceedings emanating there from are, accordingly quashed.

6. Order Dasti under signatures of the Court Master. JULY30 2018 ‘rs’ CRL.M.C. 3756/2018 SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J Page 2 of 2

Same Court & Year Delhi · 2018 Same Parties Ravi Sharma vs State & Anr Same Subject Land Acquisition