Delhi High Court
Mohd. Muzammil & Ors. vs State Govt. Of Nct Of Delhi & Anr on 17 February, 2012
Author: Suresh Kait
$~22
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CRL.M.C. 585/2012
% Judgment delivered on: 17th February, 2012
MOHD.MUZAMMIL & ORS. ..... Petitioners
Through: Mr. M. Rais Farooqui, Advocate
Versus
STATE GOVT. OF NCT OF
DELHI & ANR ..... Respondents
Through : Ms. Rajdipa Behura, APP for
State along with SI Devender
P.S. Timarpur
Mr. Saqib Bharti, Advocate for
R-2
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT
SURESH KAIT, J. (Oral)
Crl. M. A. No. 2058/2012
Exemption allowed subject to all just exceptions.
CRL.M.C. 585/2012
1. Issue notice.
2. Ms. Rajdipa Behura, learned APP accepts notice on behalf of the
State.
3. Mr. Saqib Bharti, Advocate accepts notice on behalf of
respondent No.2.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that vide FIR No. 85
dated 16.04.2011, case under Sections 498-A/406/34 of Indian Penal
Code, 1860 was registered at P.S. Timarpur, New Delhi against the
petitioners, on the complaint of respondent No.2.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that the
matter has amicably been settled vide settlement dated 01.09.2011
arrived at Mediation Centre, Tis Hazari Court, Delhi. Respondent
No.2 has settled all her claims for a total sum of `2,00,000/-. It is
further submitted that consequent to the said settlement marriage
between the petitioners No.1 and respondent No.2 has also been
dissolved by 'Talaknama'.
6. It is further submitted that out of the settlement, amount of
`1,00,000/- has already been paid to respondent No.2 and the
remaining amount of `1,00,000/- is being paid today in the court by
way of a Draft No. 193970 dated 08.02.2012 drawn on Andhra Bank,
Green Park, New Delhi to the respondent No.2, which she has accepted
without any protest.
7. Respondent No.2, who is present in person with her counsel
named above, has been identified by SI Devender, Investigating
Officer of the case.
8. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 on instruction has
submitted that she has settled all the disputes qua the aforesaid FIR and
also received the entire settlement amount. He further submits that
marriage between petitioner no.1 and respondent No.2 has been
dissolved by Talaknama, as per Muslim personnel law. She has no
objection if the FIR mentioned above quashed.
9. On the other hand, learned APP for the State submits that the
matter is pending for investigation. She further submits that in this
process Government machinery has been used and precious time of the
Court has been consumed. If this court is inclined to quash the FIR,
heavy costs should be imposed upon petitioners.
10. Keeping in view of the settlement deed dated 01.09.2011,
statement of respondent No.2 who is no more interested to pursue the
case and marriage has been dissolved between petitioner No.1 and
respondent No.2, therefore, in the interest of justice, I quash the FIR
No. 85 dated 16.04.2011 registered at P.S. Timarpur with all the
proceedings emanating therefrom.
11. Though, I find force in the submissions of ld. APP on costs,
however, keeping the financial position of the petitioners, I refrain on
imposing costs on them.
12. Criminal M.C. 585/2012 is disposed of.
13. Dasti.
SURESH KAIT, J
FEBRUARY 16, 2012
b
