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.

Bharat @ Titu and ors Vs. State and anr

Bharat @ Titu and ors vs State and anr

Type Court Judgment Court Delhi Decided Sep 27, 2011
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/920986

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
CRL.M.C.No.3235/2011
Subject
Criminal

Case Summary

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

Criminal

Key legal issue
Criminal
Acts & sections
Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860 (IPC) - Sections 498A, 406, 34

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Bharat @ Titu and ors

Advocate Mr.Pratap Singh, Adv.

Respondent

State and anr

Advocate Ms.Rajdipa Behura, Adv.

Legal References

Acts
Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860 (IPC) - Sections 498A, 406, 34

Excerpt

.....commission of india. original seen and returned to her. 5. respondent no.2 submits that she has settled the matter with the petitioners and as per settlement dated 18.05.2011, she has received total amount of ` 2,30,000/- and nothing remains due against the petitioners and she crl.m.c.no.3235/2011 page 2 of 4 does not wish to pursue present case against the petitioner. she has no objection, if the present fir is quashed. 6. ms.rajdipa behura, learned app for state submits that after investigation in the present matter, charge-sheet has been filed and matter is pending trial after framing of charge. thus, government machinery has been used and if the quashing is allowed, heavy costs must be imposed upon the petitioners. 7. keeping the settlement dated 18.05.2011 into view and the fact that marriage between the respondent no.2 and petitioner no.1 has already been dissolved and respondent no.2 does not wish to pursue her case any further, in the interest of justice, fir no.107/2008 under section 498a/406/ 34 indian penal code, 1860 registered against the petitioners at police station paten nagar, new delhi and the proceedings emanating thereto are hereby quashed. 8. i find force in the submission of learned app for state, however considering the financial conditions of the petitioners, i refrain in imposing any costs upon them. 9. accordingly, criminal m.c. no.3235/2011 is allowed and disposed of in above terms. 10. dasti.

Full Judgment

1. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that vide FIR No.107/2008 dated 04.03.2008 a case under Section 498A/406/34 Indian Penal Code, 1860 has been registered against the petitioners on the complaint of respondent No.2 at police station Patel Nagar, New Delhi. Crl.M.C.No.3235/2011 Page 1 of 4

2. Further submits that a settlement has already been arrived at between the petitioners and respondent No.2 before the Mediation Centre, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi on 18.05.2011. Vide decree of divorce dated 01.02.2011, marriage between the respondent No.2 and petitioner No.1 has been dissolved.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submitted that respondent No.2 does not wish to pursue present case any further.

4. Respondent No.2 is present in person with her learned counsel Mr.Ashok Kumar Sabharwal, Advocate who has duly identified her. Shri Sunil Kumar, brother of respondent No.2 is also present with respondent No.2. In addition, respondent No.2 has produced her original voter identity card bearing No.SMM0050567, which is issued in her name by Election Commission of India. Original seen and returned to her.

5. Respondent No.2 submits that she has settled the matter with the petitioners and as per settlement dated 18.05.2011, she has received total amount of ` 2,30,000/- and nothing remains due against the petitioners and she Crl.M.C.No.3235/2011 Page 2 of 4 does not wish to pursue present case against the petitioner. She has no objection, if the present FIR is quashed.

6. Ms.Rajdipa Behura, learned APP for State submits that after investigation in the present matter, charge-sheet has been filed and matter is pending trial after framing of charge. Thus, government machinery has been used and if the quashing is allowed, heavy costs must be imposed upon the petitioners.

7. Keeping the settlement dated 18.05.2011 into view and the fact that marriage between the respondent No.2 and petitioner No.1 has already been dissolved and respondent No.2 does not wish to pursue her case any further, in the interest of justice, FIR No.107/2008 under Section 498A/406/ 34 Indian Penal Code, 1860 registered against the petitioners at police station Paten Nagar, New Delhi and the proceedings emanating thereto are hereby quashed.

8. I find force in the submission of learned APP for State, however considering the financial conditions of the petitioners, I refrain in imposing any costs upon them.

9. Accordingly, Criminal M.C. No.3235/2011 is allowed and disposed of in above terms.

10. Dasti.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial