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.

Sandeep Gambhir and Another Vs. State and Another

Sandeep Gambhir and Another vs State and Another

Type Court Judgment Court Delhi Decided Feb 22, 2012
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/948545

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. 655 of 2012
Subject
Education

Case Summary

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

Education

Key legal issue
Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Sandeep Gambhir and Another

Respondent

State and Another

Excerpt

suresh kait, j.(oral)crl. m.a. 228 of 2012 (exemption)1. notice issued.2. ld. app accepts notice on behalf of the state.3. ld. counsel for the petitioner submits that vide fir no. 101 dated 02.04.2010, case under section 498a/406 indian penal code, 1860 was registered against the petitioners on the complaint of respondent no. 2 at police station - rani bagh.4. it is further submitted that thereafter, vide compromise deed dated 10.02.2012, respondent no. 2 has settled all the issues qua the aforesaid fir against the petitioners and she is no more interested to pursue the case further as she is living with petitioner no. 1 as husband and wife and leading a happy married life.5. respondent no. 2 is present in person. she has been identified by si dilbagh singh of police station - rani bagh. respondent no. 2 has submitted that she has settled all the issues qua the aforesaid fir against the petitioners and thereafter she has been living with petitioner no. 1 as husband and wife and leading a happy married life. there is no complaint against the petitioners.6. she has further submitted that she is no more interested to pursue the case further and, she has no objection if the fir mentioned above is quashed.7. on the other hand ld. app fairly concedes that since respondent no. 2 has settled all the issues qua the aforesaid fir against the petitioners and is living with petitioner no. 1 as husband and wife, therefore she is not opposing the quashing of the fir referred above.8. keeping the compromise deed dated 10.02.2012 and the statement of respondent no.2 that she has settled all the issues qua the aforesaid fir and is no more interested to pursue the case further, in the interest of justice, fir no. 101/2010 registered at ps-rani bagh is hereby quashed.9. accordingly, crl. m.c. 655/2012 is allowed.10. dasti.

Full Judgment

SURESH KAIT, J.

(Oral)

Crl. M.A. 228 of 2012 (exemption)

1. Notice issued.

2. Ld. APP accepts notice on behalf of the State.

3. Ld. Counsel for the petitioner submits that vide FIR no. 101 dated 02.04.2010, case under Section 498A/406 Indian Penal Code, 1860 was registered against the petitioners on the complaint of respondent no. 2 at Police Station - Rani Bagh.

4. It is further submitted that thereafter, vide Compromise Deed dated 10.02.2012, respondent no. 2 has settled all the issues qua the aforesaid FIR against the petitioners and she is no more interested to pursue the case further as she is living with petitioner no. 1 as husband and wife and leading a happy married life.

5. Respondent no. 2 is present in person. She has been identified by SI Dilbagh Singh of Police Station - Rani Bagh. Respondent no. 2 has submitted that she has settled all the issues qua the aforesaid FIR against the petitioners and thereafter she has been living with petitioner no. 1 as husband and wife and leading a happy married life. There is no complaint against the petitioners.

6. She has further submitted that she is no more interested to pursue the case further and, she has no objection if the FIR mentioned above is quashed.

7. On the other hand ld. APP fairly concedes that since respondent no. 2 has settled all the issues qua the aforesaid FIR against the petitioners and is living with petitioner no. 1 as husband and wife, therefore she is not opposing the quashing of the FIR referred above.

8. Keeping the Compromise Deed dated 10.02.2012 and the Statement of respondent no.2 that she has settled all the issues qua the aforesaid FIR and is no more interested to pursue the case further, in the interest of justice, FIR No. 101/2010 registered at PS-Rani Bagh is hereby quashed.

9. Accordingly, Crl. M.C. 655/2012 is allowed.

10. Dasti.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial