The Delhi High Court in the case observed and has quashed the FIR registered by a brother against her sister, who has recently completely her graduation in law.
The court in the case observed and has directed her to provide her assistance to its Legal Services Committee for the period of one month.
The bench headed by Justice Saurabh Banerjee in the case observed and has quashed the case filed in 2019 against the sister as well as the mother wherein the brother accused them of falsification of documents in respect of the family dispute.
In the present case, the FIR was being registered under section 404, Section 405, section 406, section 420, section 463, section 464 and section 120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. The plea was filed by sister and mother wherein seeking quashing of the FIR after they arrived at a settlement with the brother on July 25. The court in its order stated that since one the petitioners namely petitioner no.2 … has recently completed her Law Degree from the Punjab University, the said court feels that it would be in the interest of the respondent no.2 and the society at large if her services can be utilised in whatsoever manner by the DHCLSC for a brief stint of one month from November 11, 2023 to November 30, 2023.
The bench of Justice Banerjee in the case observed and has directed the that a copy of the order be sent to the Member Secretary of Delhi High Court Legal Services Committee.
The court also observed that it has been confirmed by the brother the family settlement and submitted that he voluntarily settled all disputes with her mother and sister. Thus, he also stated that he did not wish to pursue the criminal case and had no objection if the FIR is quashed.
Therefore, she informed the court that though she had shifted to Punjab, she was willing to come to Delhi and offer her legal services in whichever manner possible.
Accordingly, the court allowed the plea and FIR dated March 22, 2019 which is being registered under section 404, Section 405, section 406, section 420, section 463, section 464 and section 120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
The counsel, Advocate Kushank Sandhu, Advocate Sanya Singh and Advocate Apali Kaushal appeared for petitioners.
The counsel, ASC Sanjeev Bhandari represented the State.
