Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Subhash Chander and ors. Vs. State

Subhash Chander and ors. vs State

Type Court Judgment Court Delhi Decided Aug 30, 2001
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/709680

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

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Delhi High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
Cr. Misc. (Main) of 3108/2001
Subject
Criminal

Case Summary

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

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 482--Quashing of FIR--FIR lodged under Section 498-A/406, IPC--Both husband and wife started living peacefully and marriage has survived--No useful purpose will be served in continuing with criminal proceedings--FIR quashed--Petition allowed. -

Key legal issue
Criminal
Acts & sections
Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1973 - Sections 482

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Subhash Chander and ors.

Advocate Rajesh Banati, Adv

Respondent

State

Advocate U.L. Watwani, Adv.

Legal References

Reported In
2001(60)DRJ136

Excerpt

criminal procedure code, 1973 - section 482--quashing of fir--fir lodged under section 498-a/406, ipc--both husband and wife started living peacefully and marriage has survived--no useful purpose will be served in continuing with criminal proceedings--fir quashed--petition allowed. - r.s. sodhi, j.crl.m. (m) 3108/2001 1. i have heard learned counsel for the parties, learned counsel for the petitioners states that petitioner no. 1 and the complainant, arc living together as husband and wife and have settled all their differences. he further states that the complainant who is present in court today does not wish to pursue the proceedings arising out of her complaint which was then recorded as f.i.r. no. 87/91 under section 498-a/406 ipc registered at police station roop nagar, thereforee, no useful purpose will be served in continuing with the criminal proceedings when the marriage between the parties has survived. learned counsel for the state also agrees with the same. learned counsel for the petitioners, mr. banati identifies ms. kamlesh, let her statement be recorded.2. statement of ms. kamlesh has been recorded. in view of what has been slated by learned counsel for the parties and also the statement of ms. kamlesh, it would be proper that the matter is put to rest family as no useful purpose would be served in continuing with the trial in which ms. kamlesh is not supporting her case.3. accordingly, f.i.r. no. 87/91 under section 498-a/406 ipc registered at police station roop nagar and all the proceedings emanating there from arc hereby quashed.4. the petition is disposed of accordingly.

Full Judgment

R.S. Sodhi, J.

Crl.M. (M) 3108/2001

1. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, Learned counsel for the petitioners states that petitioner No. 1 and the complainant, arc living together as husband and wife and have settled all their differences. He further states that the complainant who is present in Court today does not wish to pursue the proceedings arising out of her complaint which was then recorded as F.I.R. No. 87/91 under Section 498-A/406 IPC registered at Police Station Roop Nagar, thereforee, no useful purpose will be served in continuing with the criminal proceedings when the marriage between the parties has survived. Learned counsel for the state also agrees with the same. Learned counsel for the petitioners, Mr. Banati identifies Ms. Kamlesh, let her statement be recorded.

2. Statement of Ms. Kamlesh has been recorded. In view of what has been slated by learned counsel for the parties and also the statement of Ms. Kamlesh, it would be proper that the matter is put to rest family as no useful purpose would be served in continuing with the trial in which Ms. Kamlesh is not supporting her case.

3. Accordingly, F.I.R. No. 87/91 under Section 498-A/406 IPC registered at Police Station Roop Nagar and all the proceedings emanating there from arc hereby quashed.

4. The petition is disposed of accordingly.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial