Chaturbhuj Sharma vs State Nct Of Delhi & Anr.
2011 Latest Caselaw 1666 Del

$~10
*    IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+                    CRL.M.C. 3005/2011

%            Judgment delivered on:23rd March, 2012

      CHATURBHUJ SHARMA                         ..... Petitioner
                  Through : Mr. Ramit Malhotra, Adv.

                     versus


      STATE NCT OF DELHI & ANR.              ..... Respondent
                    Through : Ms.Rajdipa Behura, APP for State.
                    Mr.Mukesh Sharma, Adv. for R2.

CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT


SURESH KAIT, J. (Oral)

1 Mr. Mukesh Sharma, Advocate accepts notice on behalf of respondent No.2.

2 With the consent learned counsels for the parties, the petition is taken up for final disposal today.

3 Learned counsel appearing on behalf of petitioner, submits that vide FIR No.694 dated 14.12.2009, a case was registered under Sections 498A/406 Indian Penal Code, 1860 on the complaint of respondent No.2 against the petitioner.

4 Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the matter

has been settled between the parties for a total sum of Rs.7,50,000/- which has already been paid by petitioner No.1 to respondent No.2.

5 Respondent No.2 is personally present in the court today. She has been dully identified by her counsel, Mr.Mukesh Sharma, Advocate.

6 Learned counsel for respondent No.2 upon instructions submits that respondent No.2 has settled all the disputes qua the aforementioned FIR against the petitioner. She has received the entire settlement amount. She is no more interested to pursue the case. The marriage between the parties has already been dissolved vide decree of divorce dated 09.05.2011. She has no objection if the FIR is quashed.

7 Learned APP for State submits that FIR in the instant case was lodged way back in 14.12.2009. If this court is inclined to quash the FIR in the present case, then heavy costs may be imposed upon the petitioner as in the process, the government machinery has been pressed into and precious public time has been consumed.

8 Keeping in view the above discussion, statement of respondent No.2, dissolution of marriage between petitioner No.1 and respondent No.2 and in the interest of justice, I quash FIR No.694/2009 registered at P.S.Prashant Vihar, Delhi and all the proceedings emanating therefrom.

9 Though, I find force in the submissions made by learned APP on costs, but keeping in view the poor financial position of the petitioner, I refrain imposing costs upon him.

10 Accordingly, Criminal M.C. 3005/2011 is allowed.

11    Dasti.




                                                    SURESH KAIT, J

MARCH 23, 2012
J