M. Murlimohan & Others vs State Of Nct Of Delhi & Another
2008 Latest Caselaw 968 Del

*            IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+                        CRL.M.C No.1815/2008

%                      Date of Decision : 07.07.2008


M. Murlimohan & Others                         ....... Petitioners
                Through:       Mr.Md.Ehraz Zafar, Advocate.

                                 Versus

State of NCT of Delhi & Another                ......... Respondents
                  Through : Mr.R.N. Vats, APP for the State.
                              Respondent No.2 present in person.
                              SI Shri Umesh, Investigation Officer,
                              Police Station Ambedkar Nagar, present
                              in person.


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.

Respondent No.2 is present in the court who has been identified

by SI Shri Umesh, Investigation Officer, Police Station Ambedkar Nagar.

Learned counsel for the petitioners states that there has been

settlement between the petitioner No.1 and respondent No.2. A decree

of divorce by mutual consent has been granted by decree dated 22nd

April, 2008. Regarding the claims of the respondent No.2, it had been

settled that the husband, petitioner No.1, shall pay a sum of Rs.10.00

lakhs to respondent No.2 out of which Rs.6.00 lakh was paid earlier

and a sum of Rs.4.00 lakh by way of a demand draft No.018274 dated

26.05.2008 for a sum of Rs.3.00 lakh drawn on Corporation Bank in

favour of the respondent No.2 and by another demand draft No.042371

dated 26.05.2008 drawn on ICICI Bank Limited for a sum of Rs.1.00

lakh in favour of the respondent No.2, has been paid today in the court.

The respondent No.2, who is present in the Court, states that she does

not wish to continue proceedings arising out of her complaint pursuant

to which FIR No.67/2007 dated 25th January, 2007 was registered

under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC at Police Station Ambedkar Nagar,

New Delhi against her husband and other petitioners.

Let the statement of respondent No.2 be record.

Statement of respondent No.2, Ms.Hari Kiran, has been recorded

and she states that a settlement has been arrived at with her husband,

petitioner No.1, and she does not wish to continue her complaint

against any of the petitioners.

Considering the facts and circumstances, it is apparent that no

useful purpose will be served in continuing the proceedings arising out

of the FIR No.67/2007 dated 25th January, 2007 registered under

Sections 498A/406/34 IPC at Police Station Ambedkar Nagar, New

Delhi as the parties have already settled their disputes with petitioners.

In totality of facts and circumstances and in the interest of

justice, the FIR No.67/2007 dated 25th January, 2007 registered under

Sections 498A/406/34 IPC at Police Station Ambedkar Nagar, New

Delhi, is hereby quashed. The petition is disposed of accordingly.

Dasti.

July 07, 2008                                    ANIL KUMAR, J.
'Dev'