Shri Ghanshyam Mishra & Others vs The State And Another
2008 Latest Caselaw 1444 Del

*            IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+                         CRL.M.C.No.2796/2008

%                       Date of Decision: 26.08.2008

Shri Ghanshyam Mishra & Others                         .... Petitioner

                       Through Mr.Rajesh Kumar, Advocate.

                                Versus

The State and Another                                  .... Respondents

                       Through Mr.R.N. Vats, APP for the State.
                               Respondent No.2 in person.
                               HC Sompal Singh, P.S.Karawal Nagar.
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.

*

The petitioners and respondent No.2 are present along with the

counsel for the petitioners. The learned counsel for the petitioners

contends that the differences between the petitioner No.2 and

respondent No.2 who are husband and wife have since been resolved

and they are living together as husband and wife for last about six

months. It is also contended that no useful purpose shall be served in

continuing the proceedings pursuant to FIR No.21/2007 under Sections

323/341/325/498A of Indian Penal Code registered at Police Station

Karawal Nagar, Delhi-110094. It is contended that continuation of the

proceedings shall not be conducive for the future matrimonial life of the

petitioner No.2 and respondent No.2 and in the circumstances it is

prayed that the said FIR and all the proceedings emanating therefrom

be quashed.

Let the statement of respondent No.2 be recorded.

The statement of respondent No.2, has been recorded who has

been identified by the counsel for petitioners, Shri Rajesh Kumar as

also by Head Constable Sompal Singh, Investigating Officer who is

present. This is apparent that petitioner No.2 and respondent No.2 who

are husband and wife are living together for the past six months. The

respondent No.2 has also deposed that she does not want to continue

any proceedings against her husband pursuant to a complaint made by

her on account of some misunderstanding. Considering the facts and

circumstances, it is apparent that no useful purpose would be served in

continuing the proceedings pursuant to FIR No.21/2007 under Sections

323/341/325/498A of Indian Penal Code registered at Police Station

Karawal Nagar, Delhi-110094. It shall also be in the interest of justice

and for future matrimonial life of the petitioner No.2 and respondent

No.2 to quash the said FIR and all the proceedings emanating therefrom

against the petitioners.

Learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Mr.Vats, in the facts and

circumstances, has also no objection to quashing of FIR No.21/2007

under Sections 323/341/325/498A of Indian Penal Code registered at

Police Station Karawal Nagar, Delhi-110094 against the petitioners and

all the proceedings emanating therefrom.

In the totality of facts and circumstances, the FIR No.21/2007

under Sections 323/341/325/498A of Indian Penal Code registered at

Police Station Karawal Nagar, Delhi-110094 and all the proceedings

emanating therefrom against the petitioners are quashed.

The petition is disposed of.

Dasti.

August 26, 2008                                ANIL KUMAR, J.
'k'