Atul Sejwal & Others vs The State (Nct Of Delhi) & Another
2008 Latest Caselaw 1343 Del

*             IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+                         CRL.M.C. No.2634/2008
%                       Date of Decision: 13.08.2008
Atul Sejwal & Others                              .... Petitioners
               Through Mr.Puneet Ahluwalia, Advocate

                                Versus

The State (NCT of Delhi) & Another                   .... Respondents
              Through Mr.R.N. Vats, APP for the State.
                         Mr.Rajender Vijay, Advocate for respondent
                         No.2 along with respondent No.2.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR

1.   Whether reporters of Local papers may be                  YES
     allowed to see the judgment?
2.   To be referred to the reporter or not?                    NO
3.   Whether the judgment should be reported in                NO
     the Digest?

ANIL KUMAR, J.

*

Petitioner No.1 and respondent No.2 are present along with their

counsel. Learned counsel for the petitioners and respondent No.2

contend that the petitioner No.1 and respondent No.2 have resolved all

their disputes and they are living together since 4th July, 2008. Since

all the disputes have been resolved, learned counsel for the parties

contend that no useful purpose shall be served in continuing the

proceedings pursuant to FIR No.432/2008 under Sections

498A/328/34 of Indian Penal Code registered at Police Station Malviya

Nagar, New Delhi, against the petitioners. It is also contended that

continuation of proceedings shall rather be detrimental for the future

peaceful matrimonial life of the petitioner No.1 and respondent No.2.

Let the statement of respondent No.2, Smt.Seema Sejwal, be

recorded who is identified by her counsel.

Statement of respondent No.2 has been recorded. Respondent

No.2 states that she has started living with petitioner No.1. In order to

have future peace and a normal matrimonial life, the respondent No.2

does not wish to continue with the proceeding pursuant to the above-

said FIR against the petitioners. It is apparent that no useful purpose

shall be served in continuing the proceedings pursuant to said FIR,

rather continuing of these proceedings may be detrimental to the

married life of the petitioner No.1 and respondent No.2. It shall also be

in the interest of justice to quash the FIR No.432/2008 under Sections

498A/328/34 of Indian Penal Code registered at Police Station Malviya

Nagar, New Delhi, and all the proceedings emanating therefrom against

the petitioners. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Mr.Vats, also has

no objection to quashing of the FIR against petitioners.

In the totality of facts and circumstances, the FIR No.432/2008

under Sections 498A/328/34 of Indian Penal Code registered at Police

Station Malviya Nagar, New Delhi, and all proceedings emanating

therefrom against the petitioners are quashed.

The petition is disposed of. Dasti.

August 13, 2008                                    ANIL KUMAR, J.
'Dev'