$~19
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CRL.M.C.No.3433/2011
% Judgment delivered on:14th October, 2011
VINOD & ORS ..... Petitioners
Through : Mr.M.S. Saifullah, Adv.
versus
STATE & ANR ..... Respondent
Through : Ms.Rajdipa Behura, APP
for State with SI Ram Niwas,
CWC, North-East District, Delhi in
person.
Respondent No.2 in person.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT
1. Whether the Reporters of local papers
may be allowed to see the judgment? No.
2. To be referred to Reporter or not? No.
3. Whether the judgment should be reported
in the Digest? No.
SURESH KAIT, J. (Oral)
Crl.M.A.No.12180/2011(delay) For the reasons explained, delay of 33 days in refilling stands condoned.
Criminal M.A. stands disposed of.
Crl.M.C.No.3433/2011 Page 1 of 3 Crl.M.A.No.12179/2011(exemption) Exemption is allowed subject to just exceptions. Criminal M.A. stands disposed of.
Crl.M.C.No.3433/2011
1. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that vide FIR No.90/2008 dated 01.04.2008 case under Section 498A/406/34 Indian Penal Code, 1860 read with Section 3 & 4 Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 was registered against the petitioners on the complaint of respondent No.2 at police station Khajuri Khas, Delhi.
2. Further submits that respondent No.2 and petitioner No.1 after being amicably settled the matter, started living together as husband and wife; and respondent No.2 does not wish to continue with the present case FIR.
3. Respondent No.2 Smt.Vandana present in person in the Court. She has been duly identified by the investigating officer SI Ram Niwas, CWC, North-East District, Delhi. She submits that she has settled all the issues qua the aforesaid FIR with the petitioners and now she has been staying with Crl.M.C.No.3433/2011 Page 2 of 3 her husband/petitioner No.1 in matrimonial house for the last three years. Meanwhile, they have been blessed with a son also. She has no objection, if the present FIR is quashed.
4. In the circumstances, in the interest of justice, FIR No.90/2008 under Section 498A/406/34 Indian Penal Code, 1860 read with 3 & 4 Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 registered against the petitioners on the complaint of respondent No.2 at police station Khajuri Khas, Delhi and proceedings arising therefrom are quashed.
5. Since the petitioner No.1 and respondent No.2 are happily living as husband and wife, therefore, while quashing the FIR, I refrain in imposing any costs upon the petitioners.
6. Accordingly, Criminal M.C.No.3433/2011 is allowed and disposed of in above terms.
7. Dasti.
SURESH KAIT, J October 14th 2011 Mk Crl.M.C.No.3433/2011 Page 3 of 3