Crl.M.C.3147/2011 Page 1 of 4 $~19 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on: 7th December, 2011 + CRL.M.C. 3147/2011 & Crl.M.A. No.11178/2011 NEERAJ KUMAR SHARMA & ORS ..... Petitioners Through : Mr. Satpal Singh and Mr. Vinay Shankar Dubey,Advs. versus STATE & ANR ..... Respondents Through : Ms. Rajdipa Behura, APP for the State Mr.S.K. Dubey and Mr. V. Gupta ,Advs. With respondent No.2 in person. CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT SURESH KAIT, J. (Oral) 1. Ld. counsel for the applicant submits that vide FIR No.15 dated 12.01.2008 a case was registered under Section 498A/406/323 Indian Penal Code, 1860 at PS Mandawali Fazalpur, Delhi on the complaint of respondent No.2 against the petitioners. 2. Ld. counsel for the applicant further submits that both parties had settled their disputes vide settlement dated 20.08.2008 at Delhi High Court Mediation and Conciliation Centre. 3. Ld. counsel further submits that as per sub-Clause (e) of clause 6 Crl.M.C.3147/2011 Page 2 of 4 of the settlement, it was agreed as under:- “e) After the mutual divorce is obtained by the parties, Mr. Neeraj Sharma will be free to move to the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi for quashing of FIR No.15/2008 PS Mandawali under Section 498A/323/406A, and on receipt of intimation/summon from Mr. Neeraj Sharma or from the Hon’ble Court, Ms. Nisha Sharma shall without any reluctance/reservation shall come forward for quashing of the above said FIR.” 4. Ld. counsel for the applicant further submits that all the conditions of the settlement agreement has been fulfilled by the petitioner. He had paid Rs.5,00,000/- in cash, one crossed cheque No.355147 PNB dated 02.01.2008 which is in the name of Nisha Sharma and above 15 quantity (tola) gold in the presence of IO. 5. Ld. counsel for the applicant further submits that on 02.03.2007 IO of the case also prepared seizure memo of other dowry articles, which is at page 53 of the paper book where it is written that except item No.14, respondent No.2 was not interested to take any other article. Respondent No.2 has put her signature also on this seizure memo. 6. Ld. counsel for the applicant further submits that there is no justification after the applicant arrived at settlement before Delhi High Court Mediation and Conciliation Centre, which is binding in nature. Ld. trial judge has issued summoning orders against all the petitioners Crl.M.C.3147/2011 Page 3 of 4 on 11.02.2010, after the settlement was arrived, which is bad in law. 7. Mr. S.K. Dubey, ld. Counsel for the respondent No.2 submits that the petitioner is relying upon the settlement agreement dated 20.08.2008 arrived at the Delhi High Court Mediation and Conciliation Centre. Ld. Counsel has drawn the attention of this Court to clauses (a), (d) and (e) of para 6 of the aforesaid compromise which is reproduced as under:- “(a) Both the parties have decided to part with peacefully. To achieve this end, Mr. Neeraj Kumar Sharma will prepare the petition for mutual divorce through his counsel and handover it to Shri Tabrez Alam, Advocate for Ms. Nisha Sharma for getting her signatures on the petition. After careful consideration and having trust in each other, both the parties have decided, mutual divorce petition shall not be filed before middle of January, 2009. (b).................. (c)............... (d). It will be open to Ms. Nisha Sharma to move the appropriate court/authorities to ask for her maintenance till she remarriages. (e) After the mutual divorce is obtained by the parties, Mr. Neeraj Sharma will be free to move to the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi for quashing of FIR No.15/2008 PS Mandawali under section 498A/323/406A, and on receipt of intimation/summon from Mr. Neeraj Sharma or from the Hon’ble Court, Ms. Nisha Sharma shall without any reluctance/reservation shall come forward for quashing of the above said FIR.” 8. Admittedly, the petitioner has not taken further steps to the Crl.M.C.3147/2011 Page 4 of 4 effect as noted above. However, ld. Counsel for the respondent No.2, on instructions from respondent no.2 who is present in person in the Court, submits that his client is ready to sign the divorce papers even if given today. Ld. Counsel further submits that the parties arrived at settlement to give a quietus to the all civil and criminal matters pending between them, except maintenance and alimony cases. 9. In the circumstances, parties are directed to move appropriate petitions for divorce by mutual consent etc. as agreed between them in the aforesaid settlement dated 20.08.2008. 10. Keeping in view the above statement of ld. Counsel for the respondent no.2, no orders are required to be passed in this petition and the same is disposed of. Consequently, Crl.M.A. No.11178/2011 is also disposed of accordingly. SURESH KAIT, J DECEMBER 07, 2011 RS