Bhupinder Singh & Ors vs State & Anr
2011 Latest Caselaw 4817 Del

$-22

*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+       CRL.M.C. 3242/2011

                   Judgment delivered on 27th September, 2011

        BHUPINDER SINGH & ORS            ..... Petitioner
                      Through : Mr. Vineet Agarwal, Adv.

                   Versus

        STATE & ANR                   ..... Respondent

                         Through : Mr. C.S. Chauhan, APP for
                         State along with ASI Rajender Singh,
                         P.S. Vikas Puri, Delhi.
                         Mr. Ranvir Vats, Adv. for R-2.


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)

CRL. M.A. 11526/2011 (Exemption)

Allowed subject to all just exceptions.

CRL. M.C. 3242/2011

1. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that vide FIR No.

156/2010, a case under Sections 498A/406/34 Indian Penal

Code, 1860 was registered against the petitioners at P.S.

Vikas Puri. Further submits, that the matter has been settled

between the parties for a total sum of ì 3,50,000/- The

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

has already been dissolved vide decree of divorce dated

27.07.2011.

2. It is submitted that as settled between the parties, a

sum of Rs.2,50,000/- and admitted dowry articles has been

returned to the respondent No. 2/complainant.

3. Respondent No.2/complainant is personally present in

the court today. She is duly identified by her counsel, Mr.

Ranvir Vats, Advocate and IO/ASI Rajender Singh, PS Vikas

Puri, Delhi. She submits that she does not want to pursue the

case anymore in view of the settlement arrived at between

her and the petitioners. She further submits that she has no

objection if the abovementioned FIR is quashed.

4. Learned APP for State submits that the investigations in

the case are going on, therefore, the Charge sheet has not

been filed in the Court. He further submits that since the

Government machinery has been misused and the precious

time of the court has been consumed, the petitioners must

be imposed with heavy costs.

5. I find force in the submissions made by learned APP for

State, but keeping in view the poor financial condition of the

parties, I refrain imposing cost upon the petitioners.

6. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in the

interest of justice, I quash the aforesaid FIR and all the

proceedings emanating therefrom.

7. Criminal M.C. 3242/2011 is allowed in the above terms.

                                  SURESH     KAIT,J



SEPTEMBER 27, 2011
j/RS