Sunil Talwar And Another vs State
2011 Latest Caselaw 5711 Del

$~01
*      IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+              CRL.M.C. No. 3346/2011

%              Judgment delivered on: 24th November, 2011

        SUNIL TALWAR & ANR                       ..... Petitioners
                     Through : Mr.B.N.Gupta, Adv for P-1.
                     Petitioner No.2 in person.

                        versus

        STATE                                                ..... Respondent
                                 Through : Ms.Rajdipa Behura, APP for State
                                 with SI Uma Dutt, police station Mangol Puri
                                 in person.

CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT

     1. Whether the Reporters of local papers
         may be allowed to see the judgment?                      No
     2. To be referred to Reporter or not?                        No
     3. Whether the judgment should be reported                   No
        in the Digest?

SURESH KAIT, J. (Oral)

1. Issue notice.

2. Ms.Rajdipa Behura, learned APP for State/respondent accepts notice.

3. Learned counsel for petitioners submits that a case under Section 498A/406 Indian Penal Code, 1860 was registered against the

petitioner No.1 on the complaint of petitioner No.2 vide FIR No.399/2008 at police station Mangolpuri, Delhi.

4. He further submits that vide the settlement deed dated 15.09.2009, all the issues qua the aforesaid FIR have been resolved and the marriage between the petitioners already dissolved by mutual consent divorce vide decree dated 20.08.2011.

5. Learned counsel for petitioners additionally submits that having settled the matter with the petitioner No.1, petitioner No.2 does not wish to pursue her case against petitioner No.1 and she has no objection, if the present FIR is quashed.

6. Petitioner No.2 Smt.Bharti Talwar d/o Shri O. N. Narang is personally present in the Court. She has been duly identified by the IO/SI Uma Dutt, police station Mangolpuri. She further submits that she has settled all the issues qua the present FIR with the petitioner No.1 and she has no objection if the FIR in question is quashed.

7. On instructions, learned APP for State submits that on completion of the investigation, charge-sheet has been filed against the petitioner No.1 in the Trial Court; however, charge yet not been framed against him. She further submits that since the government machinery has been put into operation and precious time of the Court has been used, heavy costs may be imposed upon the petitioner No.1, if this Court is inclined to quash the FIR.

8. Learned counsel for petitioner, on instructions from petitioner

No.1, submits that petitioner No.1 wishes to donate some amount for the welfare purposes. I appreciate the gesture advanced by petitioner No.1.

9. Accordingly, petitioner No.1 is directed to deposit a sum of ` 50,000/- in favour of the Principal/Head Master, Nursery Primary School for Mentally Retarded Children, Mayur Vihar, Delhi within two weeks from today. Proof thereof shall be placed on the record.

10. It is further directed that the Principal/Head Master of the School shall keep this amount in FDR initially for two years with any Nationalised Bank to be renewed periodically at the disposal of the Principal / Head Master and the interest accrued thereon shall be utilised for the well being of the needy children of the school.

11. Keeping the settlement between the petitioners and the fact that their marriage has since been dissolved, FIR No.399/2008 under Section 498A/406 Indian Penal Code, 1860 registered against the petitioner No.1 at police station Mangolpuri, Delhi and emanating proceedings thereto, if any, are quashed.

12. Accordingly, Criminal M.C.No.3346/2011 stands allowed and disposed of.

13. Dasti.

SURESH KAIT, J November 24, 2011 Mk