Sunil Kumar & Ors. vs State Nct Of Delhi & Anr.
2011 Latest Caselaw 6289 Del

$~24
*    IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI


+      CRL.M.C. 2996/2011

%              Judgment delivered on: 21st December, 2011


SUNIL KUMAR & ORS.                     ..... Petitioners
                  Through: Mr.G.K. Sharma, Adv.

                     versus


STATE NCT OF DELHI & ANR.                ..... Respondent
                   Through: Ms. Rajdipa Behura, APP for State.
                   Mr. A.V. Gupta, Adv. for R-2.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT

SURESH KAIT, J. (Oral)

+ CRL. M.C. 2996/2011

1. Ld. Counsel for the petitioners submits that vide FIR no. 479

dated 7.10.2005, case under Section 498A/406/34 Indian Penal Code,

1860 was registered at PS-Timarpur against the petitioners on the

complaint of respondent no. 2.

2. Ld. Counsel for the petitioners further submit that matter has

been settled between the parties and pursuant to that marriage between

the petitioner no.1 and respondent no. 2 has been dissolved vide decree

dated 05.06.2010.

3. Ld. Counsel for petitioners further submits that respondent no. 2

is no more interested to pursue the case as she has received the entire

amount as has been settled and the balance amount of Rs.30,000/- is

being paid today by way of cheque issued by Indian Bank in favour of

respondent no.2.

4. Respondent no. 2 is personally present in the court with her

counsel, who has identified her as Smt. Neetu, D/o, Sh. Jawahar Singh,

R/o, Gali No. 16, Kaushik Enclave, Nathupura, Burari, Delhi.

5. Ld. Counsel for respondent no. 2 on instruction from respondent

no. 2 submits that she does not want to pursue the case further and does

not rebut the contention of ld. Counsel for the petitioners.

6. Ld. APP on the other hand submits that in the instant case

chargesheet has been filed and after framing the charges on the

petitioners, case is pending before the trial court for Prosecution

Evidence. She further submits that if this court is inclined to quash the

FIR, heavy cost may be imposed on the petitioners as Govt. Machinery

has been pressed and precious time of the court has been consumed.

7. Though, I find force in the submission of ld. APP for State,

however, keeping in view the financial condition of the petitioners. I

refrain from imposing cost on the petitioners.

8. Keeping in view the settlement arrived at between the parties

and the Statement of respondent no. 2, I quash the FIR no. 479/05 of

PS-Timar Pur with emanating proceedings thereto.

9. Crl.M.C. 2996/2011 is allowed on the above terms.

10. Dasti.

SURESH KAIT, J

DECEMBER 21, 2011 jg