Mukesh Kumar & Ors vs State & Ors
2011 Latest Caselaw 4750 Del

$~7
*   IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+            CRL.M.C.No.2779/2011

%            Judgment delivered on:23rd September,2011

        MUKESH KUMAR & ORS                ..... Petitioners
                     Through Mr. Om Prakash and Mr. R D Joshi,
                     Advs.
                versus

        STATE & ORS                            ..... Respondents

                        Through Ms. Rajdipa Behura, APP for State
                        with ASI Kamlesh, PS Dwarka, South
                        Mr. A K Tripathi, Adv. for R-2 along with
                        R-2 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
        in the Digest?                                 No.

SURESH KAIT, J. (Oral)

1. Issue notice.

2. Ld. APP accepts notice on behalf of State.

3. Mr. A K Tripathi, Adv. accepts notice on behalf of

respondent No.2.

4. Ld. counsel for the petitioners submits that vide FIR

No.1039/2007 a case was registered under Section 406/498A/34

Indian Penal Code, 1860 against the petitioners on the complaint

of respondent No.2 at PS Najafgarh, New Delhi.

5. Ld. counsel for the petitioners further submits that both the

parties have amicably settled their disputes, therefore, do not

want to pursue the case further.

6. Respondent No.2 namely, Mamta R/o RZC-134, Gali Bengali

Painter, Roshan Vihar, Najafgarh, New Delhi is personally

present in Court today with her counsel, who has identified her.

W/ASI Kamlesh IO is present in Court, who has also identified

respondent No.2 as Mamta.

7. Respondent No.2 submits that vide compromise deed

dated 26.04.2008 all the issues qua the aforesaid FIR has been

settled against the petitioners. As per the settlement total

amount of ì.2,30,000/- has already been received by her. The

marriage between the petitioner No.1 and respondent No.2 has

been dissolved under Section 13B of Hindu Marriage Act on

05.09.2008. She does not want to pursue the case further and

she has no objection if the present FIR is quashed.

8. Keeping the aforesaid decree of divorce and the settlement

between the petitioner No.1 and respondent No.2 into view and

in the interest of justice I quash FIR No.1039/2007 registered

under Section 406/498A/34 Indian Penal Code, 1860 against the

petitioners on the complaint of respondent No.2 at PS Najafgarh,

New Delhi and emanating proceedings thereto.

9. Ld. APP for State submits that charge-sheet has already

been filed and the charges are yet to be framed. Further

submits that while quashing the FIR cost should be imposed on

the petitioners since the Government machinery has been used

and precious time of the Court has been consumed.

10. Though I find force in the submission of ld. APP, however,

keeping in view the financial position of the petitioners I defer

imposing cost on them.

11. Crl.M.C.2779/2011 is allowed in the above terms.

12. Dasti under signature of the Court Master.

SURESH KAIT, J

September 23, 2011 Vld/RS