Delhi High Court
Naved Jamal & Others vs State, Govt. Of Nct Of Delhi & ... on 28 August, 2008
Author: Anil Kumar
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CRL.M.C.No.2040/2008
% Date of Decision: 28.08.2008
Naved Jamal & Others .... Petitioners
Through Mr.Vinod Khanna, Advocate along with
petitioner Nos.1 and 2 in person.
Versus
State, Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Another .... Respondents
Through Mr.R.N. Vats, APP for the State.
Mr.P. Norula, Advocate for respondent
No.2 along with respondent No.2 in
person.
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.
*
Crl.M.A. No.7646/2008
Allowed, subject to just exceptions.
The application is disposed of.
CRL.M.C.No.2040/2008
Petitioner Nos.1 and 2 and respondent No.2 are present along
with their counsel. Learned counsel for the parties have contended that
the marriage between the petitioner No.1 and respondent No.2 has been
dissolved by a decree of divorce 21.04.2008 under Section 28(2) of the
Special Marriage Act, 1954. All other disputes have also been resolved
and a settlement has been arrived at between the parties. Under the
settlement, respondent No.2 is entitled for Rs.3.00 lakh in satisfaction
of all her claims against the petitioners, out of which Rs.2.00 lakh was
paid to her earlier and the balance amount of
Rs.1.00 lakh has been paid to her in the court today by way of demand
draft bearing No.233130 dated 28.08.2008 drawn on ABN Amro Bank.
Let the statement of respondent No.2 be recorded.
Statement of respondent No.2 has been recorded who has been
identified by her counsel. Respondent No.2 has deposed that she has
settled all her claims and her marriage with petitioner No.1 has been
dissolved by a decree of divorce 21.04.2008 under Section 28(2) of the
Special Marriage Act, 1954.
Considering the facts and circumstances, it is apparent that no
useful purpose shall be served in continuing with the proceedings
pursuant to FIR No.235/2003 dated 16.12.2003 under Sections
498A/406 of Indian Penal Code registered at Police Station Kapashera
against the petitioners. It shall also be in the interest of justice to
quash the said FIR and all the proceedings emanating therefrom, in the
facts and circumstances. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor,
Mr.Vats, has also no objection to quashing of FIR No.235/2003 dated
16.12.2003 under Sections 498A/406 of Indian Penal Code registered
at Police Station Kapashera and all the proceedings emanating
therefrom against the petitioners.
In the totality of facts and circumstances, FIR No.235/2003 dated
16.12.2003 under Sections 498A/406 of Indian Penal Code registered
at Police Station Kapashera and all the proceedings emanating
therefrom against the petitioners are quashed.
The petition is disposed of.
Dasti.
August 28, 2008 ANIL KUMAR, J.
'Dev'
