Ajay Khurana And Ors. vs Meenu Khurana And Anr.
1999 Latest Caselaw 231 Del

JUDGMENT

N.G. Nandi, J.

1. Notice to the respondents. Mr. M.S. Butalia, learned APP accepts notice on behalf of respondent No. 2/State. Let a copy of the petition be supplied to him.

2. Mr. Sandeep Kapoor, Advocate states that he waives the service and accepts notice on behalf of respondent No. 1. He further states that respondent No. 1 is present in court and that he would file power of attorney on behalf of respondent No. 1. It is further staled that he has filed affidavit of respondent No. 1 in support of the prayer for quashing of the FIR and that necessary order quashing the FIR filed by respondent No. 1 be passed today .

3. In this petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the petitioners have been praying for the quashing of the FIR No. 393/97 P.S. Kalkaji, New Delhi for the offence under Sections 498-A/406 IPC initiated by respondent No. 1 (complainant).

4. The petitioner No. 1, to substantiate the averments of the petition, has sworn in affidavit and testified to the effect that respondent No. 1 is his lawfully wedded wife; that in the year 1996 respondent No. 1 temporarily separated from the society of the deponent and FIR No. 393/97 P.S. Kalkaji, New Delhi for the offence under Sections 498-A/406 IPC came to be initialed by respondent No. 1; that subsequent thereto, because of the intervention of the relatives, a settlement was arrived at between the deponent and respondent No. 1 (complainant) with the result respondent No. 1 returned to the matrimonial home and resumed cohabitation with the deponent from 15.7.1998; that since the deponent and respondent No. 1 have once again been staying together as husband and wife and all disputes and differences have been resolved and amicably settled, FIR No. 393/97 P.S. Kalkaji, New Delhi for the offence under Sections 498A/406 IPC lodged by respondent No. 1 be quashed as no useful purpose would now be served by continuing the same.

5. Petitioner No. 1, who is present in person, states that one child is born to respondent No. 1 through him during the wedlock and that in the interest of the future of the child also, the FIR filed by respondent No. 1 be quashed.

6. Respondent No. 1 has sworn in affidavit to the effect that petitioner No. 1 is her husband; that in the year 1996 she temporarily separated from the society of her husband petitioner No. 1; that thereafter FIR No. 393/97 P.S. Kalkaji, New Delhi for the offenee under Sections 498A/406 IPC came to be filed by respondent No. 1 against petitioner No. 1 Ajay Khurana and other petitioners; that subsequent thereto all disputes and differences have been amicably settled and settlement was reached with the petitioners with the result deponent returned to the matrimonial home on 15.7.1998 and resumed cohabitation with petitioner No. 1 and that she has been living with petitioner No. 1. and both have been staying together as husband and wife; that deponent has no objection if FIR No. 393/97 P.S. Kalkaji, New Delhi for the offence under Sections 498-A/406 IPC is quashed in view of the settlement of all the disputes and resumption of cohabitation with petitioner No. 1.

7. Respondent No. 1, who is present in person, states that one daughter is born to her through petitioner No. 1 during their wedlock and that in the interest of her matrimonial life as also the future of their daughter, the aforesaid FIR initiated by her be quashed as no useful purpose would now be served by continuing the same.

8. In view of the affidavits filed by petitioner No. 1 and respondent No. 1, as aforestated, looking to the fact that respondent No. 1 has returned to the matrimonial home and cohabitation resumed with petitioner No. 1 and both of them once again leading a happy married life and the fact that one daughter is born during the wedlock to respondent No. 1 through petitioner No. 1, in the interest of the future of their minor daughter and in the interest of the matrimonial life of the spouses namely petitioner No. 1 and respondent No. 1 aforesaid FIR initiated by respondent No. 1 needs to be quashed as the ends of justice also require the quashing of the FIR filed by respondent No. 1.

9. In the result, the petition is allowed. FIR No. v393/97 P.S. Kalkaji, New Delhi for the offence under Sections 498A/406 IPC filed by respondent No. 1. Meenu Khurana against the petitioners Ajay Khurana, Chaman Lal Khurana and Smt. Sudershan Devi is hereby ordered to be quashed as the ends of the justice, for the reasons aforestated, require the same.

10. Petition disposed of accordingly.