Ahshan @ Shanu vs State And Ors.
2008 Latest Caselaw 1429 Del

*     IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+           Crl. M.C. No. 2690/2008 & Crl. M.A. 9918/2008

%                       DATE OF DECISION : 22nd AUGUST, 2008

      AHSHAN @ SHANU                            ..... Petitioner

                        Through:    Mr. Sumit Kr. Khatri, Advocate

                  versus

      STATE AND ORS.                      ....Respondents

                        Through:    Mr. R.N. Vats, APP for the State.
                                    Mr. Mohit Vohra, Advocate for
                                    respondent Nos. 2 and 3.
                                    SI Rajkuar, PS Nangloi.


CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN

1. Whether Reporters of local papers may
   be allowed to see the judgment?                                   No
2. To be referred to the Reporter or not?                            No
3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the digest?            No

                        JUDGMENT

MANMOHAN, J: (ORAL)

1. The present petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

for quashing of FIR No. 94/2002 registered with PS Nangloi, Delhi,

under Sections 363 and 366 IPC as well as the proceedings arising

therefrom and now pending in the court of Shri A.K. Arya, ASJ, Rohini

Courts, Delhi.

2. The facts of this case are that on 4th February, 2002,

Respondent No. 2, i.e. father of the girl, made a complaint stating that

his daughter, Sayma, was missing from her family home. In

pursuance to the complaint filed by Respondent No. 2, the present

FIR was registered. Later on, it transpired that the Petitioner had

married Sayma on 6th June, 2002. Since then they have been happily

living together. In fact, on 12th April, 2003, Ms. Syma gave birth to a

male child.

3. The present petition for quashing is supported by an affidavit of

Respondent No. 2 wherein he has stated that all the disputes

between him and the petitioner have been amicably resolved and he

has no objection if the impugned FIR filed by him is quashed by this

Court.

4. Ms. Sayma is also present in Court and she has been identified

by her counsel. She makes a statement that she is living with the

Petitioner and that she has no complaint against him.

5. Consequently, this Court sees no useful purpose in allowing the

present proceedings to continue any further and the impugned FIR

No. 94/2002 registered with PS Nangloi, Delhi, under Sections 363

and 366 IPC as well as the proceedings arising therefrom and now

pending in the court of Shri A.K. Arya, ASJ, Rohini Courts, Delhi, are

hereby quashed.

5. The present petition is allowed in above terms. Order dasti.

August 22, 2008                                MANMOHAN, J.
rb