Sher Singh & Others vs State & Another
2008 Latest Caselaw 953 Del

*             IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+                           CRL.M.C No.2066/2008

%                         Date of Decision : 04.07.2008


Sher Singh & Others                             ....... Petitioners
                 Through:          Mr.Vikas Goswami, Advocate for the
                                   petitioner along with petitioner No.1 in
                                   person.


                                     Versus


State & Another                                ......... Respondents
                       Through :   Mr.Amit Sharma, APP for the State along
                                   with complainant Smt.Usha in person.
                                   SI Shri Rajender Singh, IO is present.


CORAM :-
* HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR

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


ANIL KUMAR, J.

*

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties.

It is disclosed that respondent No.2 has settled her disputes with

the petitioner No.1, her husband, and other family members of the

petitioner No.1. Pursuant to the settlement between the petitioner No.1

and respondent No.2, husband and wife, the maintenance has been

paid to the respondent No.2 and she has also got money in the form of

fixed deposit in the name of her daughter. The application for

maintenance filed by the petitioner under Section 125 of the Code of

Civil Procedure has also been settled. The respondent No.2 and the

petitioner No.1 has also agreed that the daughter from the marriage

between the petitioner No.1 and respondent No.2 will stay with the

respondent No.2.

In the circumstances, respondent no.2 does not wish to continue

the proceedings pursuant to FIR No.200/2006 registered at Police

Station Anand Vihar under Section 498A/406/34 IPC and she seeks

that the same be quashed against the petitioners.

Let the statement of Smt.Meenakshi, Respondent No.2, be

recorded. The Investigating Officer, Mr.Rajender Singh, Sub Inspector,

has identified Smt.Meenakshi, Respondent No.2, and Shri Sher Singh,

petitioner no.1.

Statement of Smt.Meenakshi, Respondent No.2, has been

recorded who has deposed that she does not want to continue

proceedings arising out of her complaint being FIR No.200/2006 under

Sections 498A/406/34 IPC, registered at Police Station: Anand Vihar.

Learned counsel for the State has also no objection. No useful purpose

would be served by continuing the proceedings in the facts and

circumstances.

In the totality of facts and circumstances, FIR No.200/2006

under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC, registered at Police Station: Anand

Vihar, and all the proceedings arising and emanating therefrom against

the petitioners are hereby quashed.

With these directions, the petition is disposed of.

Dasti.

July 04, 2008                                      ANIL KUMAR, J.
'Dev'