Rajkumar & Ors. vs State & Anr.
2012 Latest Caselaw 1322 Del

$~60
*    IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+         CRL.M.C. 715/2012

%           Judgment delivered on: 27th February, 2012

     RAJKUMAR & ORS.   ..... Petitioners
                 Through:Ms. Sunila Choudhary, Advocate

                           Versus

     STATE & ANR.                                    ..... Respondents

                           Through : Ms. Rajdipa Behrua, APP for the
                           State with ASI Surender, PS Rohini.
                           Mr. Lokesh Aggarwal and
                           Mr. Ankit Mittal, Advs. for complainant/ R-2
                           with R-2 in person.

CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT

SURESH KAIT, J. (Oral)

Crl.M.A.No.2532/2012(exemption)

Exemption is allowed subject to just exceptions. Criminal M.A. stands disposed of.

CRL.M.C. 715/2012

1. Notice issued.

2. Ld. APP accepts notice on behalf of the State/R-1.

3. Ld. Counsel accepts notice on behalf of Respondent No.2/complainant.

4. With the consent of the parties, the instant petition is being taken

up for final disposal.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that vide FIR No. 200/2001 dated 22.03.2001, a case under Section 498-A/406/34 of the Indian Penal Code, was registered at P.S. Rohini, Delhi against the petitioners, on the complaint of respondent No.2.

6. It is further submitted that thereafter the matter has amicably been settled between the parties on 10.12.2010 before the Family Court-I, Rohini, Delhi whereby the respondent No.2/complainant has settled all the disputes qua the aforesaid FIR.

7. Consequent to the settlement, the marriage between the Respondent No.2 and the petitioner No.1 has been dissolved by mutual consent divorce decree dated 13.12.2011.

8. Ld. Counsel further submits that the respondent No.2/complainant does not wish to pursue the case further, therefore the FIR mentioned above and all emanating proceedings thereto may be quashed.

9. Respondent No.2 is personally present with her counsel. She has been identified by ASI Surender Singh, IO of the case. Ld. Counsel for respondent No.2, on instructions, submitted that she has settled all the issues qua the aforesaid FIR and pursuant to the aforesaid settlement the marriage between the respondent No.2 and the petitioner No.1 has been dissolved by mutual consent divorce decree dated 13.12.2011. Therefore, she is not interested to pursue the case further and she has no objection if the above mentioned FIR and the consequent proceedings emanating therefrom be quashed.

10. Learned APP for the State, on the other hand, submits that if this

court is inclined to quash the FIR, heavy costs should be imposed upon petitioners as in this process Government machinery has been pressed into and precious time of the Court has been consumed.

11. Keeping in view of the settlement arrived at between the respondent No.2; the fact that the marriage between the respondent No.2 and the petitioner No.1 has been dissolved by mutual consent divorce decree dated 13.12.2011; and the statement of the respondent No.2 who is no more interested to pursue the case further, therefore, in the interest of justice, I quash the FIR No. 200/2001 registered at P.S. Rohini, Delhi with all the criminal proceedings emanating therefrom.

12. Though, I find force in the submissions of ld. APP, however, keeping the financial position of the petitioners, I refrain from imposing costs on them.

13. Criminal M.C. 715/2012 is disposed of.

14. Dasti.

SURESH KAIT, J

FEBRUARY 27, 2012 RS