Delhi High Court
Sh.Manoj Kumar & Others vs The State Of Delhi & Another on 1 September, 2008
Author: Anil Kumar
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CRL.M.C.No.2643/2008
% Date of Decision: 01.09.2008
Sh.Manoj Kumar & Others .... Petitioners
Through Ms.Renu Chauhan, Advocate for petitioners
along with petitioner No.1 in person.
Versus
The State of Delhi & Another .... Respondents
Through Mr.R.N.Vats, APP for the State
Mr.C.S.Rana, 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.9789/2008
Allowed, subject to just exceptions.
The application is disposed of.
Crl.M.C.No.2643/2008
Learned counsel for the petitioners and respondent No.2 contend
that the disputes between the parties have been resolved amicably. The
marriage between the petitioner No.1 and respondent No.2 has been
dissolved by a decree of divorce dated 04.08.2008 by mutual consent
under Section 13 B (2) of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. It is also
contended that under the settlement the respondent No.2 is entitled for
Rs.2.50 lakhs out of which Rs.1.50 lakhs was paid earlier and the
balance amount of Rs.1 lakh has been paid today in the Court by a
demand draft bearing No.345854 dated 23rd July, 2008 drawn on
Syndicate Bank, Ambedkar Nagar, Delhi. In the circumstances,
counsel contend that no useful purpose shall be served in continuing
with the proceedings pursuant to FIR No.26/2008 under Sections
498A/406/34 of Indian Penal Code registered at Police Station
Bindapur against the petitioners. It is also contended that it shall be in
the interest of justice if the said FIR and all the proceedings emanating
therefrom against the petitioners are quashed.
Let the statement of respondent No.2 be recorded.
Statement of respondent No.2 has been recorded who has been
identified by her counsel. Considering the statement of respondent
No.2 it is apparent that no useful purpose shall be served in continuing
the proceedings pursuant to FIR No.26/2008 under Sections
498A/406/34 of Indian Penal Code registered at Police Station
Bindapur 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.26/2008 under Sections 498A/406/34 of Indian Penal Code
registered at Police Station Bindapur and all the proceedings emanating
therefrom against the petitioners.
In the totality of facts and circumstances, FIR No.26/2008 under
Sections 498A/406/34 of Indian Penal Code registered at Police Station
Bindapur and all the proceedings emanating therefrom against the
petitioners are quashed.
The petition is disposed of.
Dasti.
September 01, 2008 ANIL KUMAR, J.
'k'
