Mairajuddin & Ors vs State & Anr
2012 Latest Caselaw 1293 Del

$~34
*    IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+            CRL.M.C. No.677/2012

%            Judgment delivered on:24th February, 2012

MAIRAJUDDIN & ORS                            ..... Petitioner
                               Through : Mr.Anil K. Gujral, Adv.

                      versus


STATE & ANR                                     ..... Respondent
                               Through : Ms.Rajdipa Behura, APP
                                         Respondent no.2 in person.


CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT

SURESH KAIT, J. (Oral)

Crl. M.A. No. 2385/2012 (exemption)

Exemption allowed subject to just exceptions.

+     Crl. M.C. 677/2012
1.    Notice issued.

2. Learned APP accepts notice on behalf of respondent no.1. Respondent No.2 Smt.Mustar Jahan is present in the court.

3. With the consent of both the parties, the instant petitions is taken for final disposal.

4. Vide the said petition, the petioner sought to quash the FIR

No.616/2007 registered against the petitioners under sections 406/498- A/34 of I.P.C. at P.S. Sarita Vihar and the chargesheet / proceedings pending against the petioners.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the respondent no. 2 has settled all the issues qua the aforesaid FIR against the petitioners. After resolving the issues, respondent no. 2 and petitioner no. 1 are living together as husband and wife since April, 2011. She is living happily. There is no more complaint against the petitioner no.1. Therefore, she is not interested to pursue the case further.

6. Respondent no.2 is personally present in the court who has been identified by the learned counsel for the petitioners. She has submitted that she has settled all the issues and pray to quash the FIR and therefore she not interested to pursue the case further. Pursuance to the settlement, she is living with the petitioner no. 1 as husband and wife since April, 2011 and she has no complaint against the petitioner. If the FIR mentioned above and emenating proceedings thereto are quashed, she has no objection.

7. Learned APP on the other hand submitted that after the chargesheet has been filed and charges have yet to be framed. Since respondent no.2 has amicably resolved all the issues and started living together with the petitioner no.1 as husband and wife, in the eventually, she does not oppose the instant petition.

8. Therefore, keeping the settlement between petitioner and respondent no.2, as she is living with the petitioner no.1 as husband and wife, happily. In the interest of justice, I quash the FIR with the

emanating proceeding thereto.

9. In the interest of justice, the said petition is allowed.

10. No order as to cost.

SURESH KAIT, J

FEBRUARY 24, 2012 ac