Delhi High Court
Harkirat Singh & Ors vs The State Nct Of Delhi & Anr on 29 February, 2012
Author: Suresh Kait
$~7
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CRL.M.C. 200/2012
% Judgment delivered on: 29th February, 2012
HARKIRAT SINGH & ORS ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Rajiv Sachar, Adv.
versus
THE STATE NCT OF DELHI
& ANR ..... Respondent
Through: Mr. Navin Sharma, APP for State.
W/ASI Rishali Yadav, PS-Tilak Nagar.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT
SURESH KAIT, J. (Oral)
1. Ld. Counsel for the petitioners submits that vide FIR no. 269
dated 03.09.2010, case under Section 420/498A/406/34 Indian Penal
Code, 1860 was registered against the petitioners on the complaint of
respondent no. 2 at PS-Tilak Nagar.
2. It is further submitted that vide settlement dated 23.05.2011,
respondent no. 2 has settled all the issues qua the aforesaid FIR against
the petitioners.
3. As per the settlement, petitioner no.1 agreed to pay a sum of
Rs.9.25 Lacs. Out of which Rs.8 Lacs has already been paid to
respondent no. 2 and the remaining amount of Rs.1.25 Lacs has been
paid to respondent no. 2 in court by way of two Demand Drafts
bearing no. 042257 dated 10.12.2011 of Rs.60,000/- and 597894 dated
12.12.2011 of Rs.65,000/-.
4. Ld. Counsel has further submitted that respondent no. 2 is no
more interested to pursue the case further, therefore, instant petition
may be allowed.
5. Respondent no. 2 is personally present in the court, who is
identified by W/ASI Rishali Yadav, PS-Tilak Nagar. She has also
produced her Driving Licence bearing no. DL-0420050146839 issued
by Transport Department, Govt. of NCT of Delhi, which stands in her
name (Original seen and returned).
6. Respondent no.2 has submitted that consequent to the settlement
dated 23.05.2011 she has received the entire settlement amount. More
so, their marriage has been dissolved by mutual consent vide Decree of
Divorce dated 08.12.2011, therefore, she is not interested to pursue the
case further. If the FIR aforementioned above is quashed, she has no
objection.
7. Ld. APP on the other hand submits that after investigation,
chargesheet has been filed by the State. However, charges are yet to be
framed. He further submits that if this Court is inclined to quash the
FIR referred above, heavy costs be imposed upon the petitioners as in
this process, Govt. machinery has been pressed into and precious
public time has been consumed.
8. Keeping the settlement dated 23.05.2011, Statement of
Respondent no. 2 that she is no more interested to pursue the case
further, dissolution of marriage between petitioner no. 1 and
respondent no. 2 vide Decree of Divorce dated 08.12.2011 into view
and in the interest of justice, FIR no. 269 dated 03.09.2010 registered
at PS-Tilak Nagar is hereby quashed with emanating proceedings
thereto.
9. Though, I find force in the submission of ld. APP on costs,
however, keeping in view the financial position of the petitioners, I
refrain in imposing costs upon them.
10. Accordingly, Crl. M.C. 200/2012 is allowed.
11. Dasti.
SURESH KAIT, J
FEBRUARY 29, 2012
jg
