Dwarka Nath Kundra And Ors. vs Moti Lal Bhatia And Ors.
1991 Latest Caselaw 306 Del

JUDGMENT

V.B. Bansal, J.

1. This petition under Sec. 482 Cr.P.C. read with Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioners pr lying that the proceedings in complaint Moti Lal Bhatia and Smt. Poonam v. Dwarka Nath Kundra and Others pending in the Court of Shri J.K. Pali, M.M. may be quashed.

2. Briefly stated the facts leading to the filing of this petition are that respondent no. 2 Smt. Poonam is the daughter of Moti Lal Bhatia respondent no. 1. She was married to Ravinder Nath Kundra on 9th February, 1981. The petitioners 1 and 2 are the parents of the petitioner 3. After her marriage Smt. Poonam started residing with her husband and out of this wedlock she gave birth to a son named Master Khushal. They, however, could not go on smoothly and so started residing separately. Thereafter Moti Lal Bhatia and Smt. Poonam filed a complaint under Sec. 406 read with Sec. 34 IPC, and after recording of the preliminary evidence the petitioners were summoned. Now at the intervention of the respectable the marriage of the petitioner no. 3 with respondent no. 2 has been dissolved by a decree of divorce passed by Ms. Sharda Aggarwal, Additional Distt. Judge on 1st April, 1991. As per the compromise arrived at between the parties minor child Master Khushal would continue to be in the custody of his mother and the petitioner no. 3 deposited a bank-draft for Rs. 13000/- in the Court of Ms. Aruna Suresh payable to her.

3. It has, therefore, been stated by the respondents and the petitioner no. 3 that the said draft of Rs. 13000/- has today been handed over to respondent no. 2 by Ms. Aruna Suresh, Guardian Judge, Delhi. No dispute now remains and both the respondents have made statements that they do not want to proceed further with the complaint. Their separate statements have already been recorded. ,

4. Considering all the facts and circumstances, I am clearly of the view that on account of the disputes between the parties having already been settled it is not a fit case where proceedings in the complaint should continue.

5. As a result the petition is allowed and the proceedings in the complaint Moti Lal Bhatia and Smt. Poonam v. Dwarka Nath Kundra and others under Sec. 406 read with S. 34 IPC pending in the Court of Shri J.K. Pali, Metropolitan Magistrate, Delhi stand quashed.