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.

Bhupinder Singh and ors Vs. State and anr

Bhupinder Singh and ors vs State and anr

Type Court Judgment Court Delhi Decided Sep 27, 2011
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/920989

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. 3242/2011
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

Bhupinder Singh and ors

Advocate Mr. Vineet Agarwal, Adv.

Respondent

State and anr

Advocate Mr. C.S. Chauhan, Adv.

Legal References

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

Excerpt

1. learned counsel for petitioner submits that vide fir no. 156/2010, a case under sections 498a/406/34 indian penal code, 1860 was registered against the petitioners at p.s. vikas puri. further submits, that the matter has been settled between the parties for a total sum of ì 3,50,000/- the marriage between the petitioner no. 1 and respondent no. 2 has already been dissolved vide decree of divorce dated 27.07.2011. 2. it is submitted that as settled between the parties, a sum of rs.2,50,000/- and admitted dowry articles has been returned to the respondent no. 2/complainant. 3. respondent no.2/complainant is personally present in the court today. she is duly identified by her counsel, mr. ranvir vats, advocate and io/asi rajender singh, ps vikas puri, delhi. she submits that she does not want to pursue the case anymore in view of the settlement arrived at between her and the petitioners. she further submits that she has no objection if the abovementioned fir is quashed. 4. learned app for state submits that the investigations in the case are going on, therefore, the charge sheet has not been filed in the court. he further submits that since the government machinery has been misused and the precious time of the court has been consumed, the petitioners must be imposed with heavy costs. 5. i find force in the submissions made by learned app for state, but keeping in view the poor financial condition of the parties, i refrain imposing cost upon the petitioners. 6. in the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice, i quash the aforesaid fir and all the proceedings emanating therefrom. 7. criminal m.c. 3242/2011 is allowed in the above terms.

Full Judgment

1. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that vide FIR No. 156/2010, a case under Sections 498A/406/34 Indian Penal Code, 1860 was registered against the petitioners at P.S. Vikas Puri. Further submits, that the matter has been settled between the parties for a total sum of ì 3,50,000/- The marriage between the petitioner No. 1 and respondent No. 2 has already been dissolved vide decree of divorce dated 27.07.2011.

2. It is submitted that as settled between the parties, a sum of Rs.2,50,000/- and admitted dowry articles has been returned to the respondent No. 2/complainant.

3. Respondent No.2/complainant is personally present in the court today. She is duly identified by her counsel, Mr. Ranvir Vats, Advocate and IO/ASI Rajender Singh, PS Vikas Puri, Delhi. She submits that she does not want to pursue the case anymore in view of the settlement arrived at between her and the petitioners. She further submits that she has no objection if the abovementioned FIR is quashed.

4. Learned APP for State submits that the investigations in the case are going on, therefore, the Charge sheet has not been filed in the Court. He further submits that since the Government machinery has been misused and the precious time of the court has been consumed, the petitioners must be imposed with heavy costs.

5. I find force in the submissions made by learned APP for State, but keeping in view the poor financial condition of the parties, I refrain imposing cost upon the petitioners.

6. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice, I quash the aforesaid FIR and all the proceedings emanating therefrom.

7. Criminal M.C. 3242/2011 is allowed in the above terms.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial