Brijesh & Ors vs State & Anr
2012 Latest Caselaw 701 Del

$~7
*   IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+              CRL.M.C. No.62/2012

%              Judgment delivered on: 1st February, 2012

       BRIJESH & ORS                       ..... Petitioner
                              Through : Mr.Virendra Rana, Adv.

                     versus


       STATE & ANR                       ..... Respondent
                              Through : Mr.Navin Sharma, APP for State.
                              Mr. Gaurav Chaudhary, Adv. for R-2.

CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT

SURESH KAIT, J. (Oral)

1. Ld. Counsel for the parties have jointly stated that vide FIR no. 182 dated 09.06.2010, case under Section 498A/406/34 Indian Penal Code, 1860 was registered against the petitioners on the complaint of respondent no. 2 at PS-Kalyan Puri.

2. It is further submitted that respondent no. 2 has settled all the issues qua the aforesaid FIR with the petitioners and marriage between petitioner no. 1 and respondent no. 2 has been dissolved my mutual consent vide Decree of Divorce dated 25.05.2011 and she is no more interested to pursue the case further, therefore aforesaid FIR be quashed.

3. Respondent no. 2 is personally present in the Court with her

Counsel. On instruction, ld. Counsel for respondent no. 2 has stated that she is no more interested to pursue the case further as she has settled all the issues qua the aforesaid FIR. Consequent thereto, marriage between petitioner no.1 and respondent no.2 has been dissolved and if the aforesaid FIR is quashed, she has no objection.

4. Ld. Counsel for respondent no. 2 further submits that as per the total agreed amount of Rs.5.5 Lacs, respondent no. 2 has already received Rs.4.5 Lacs and the balance amount of Rs.1,00,000/-, she has received today by way of cash in the court without any protest.

5. Ld. APP on the other hand submits that since in this process Govt. machinery has been pressed into and precious time of the court has been consumed, therefore while quashing the FIR heavy costs be imposed on the petitioners.

6. Keeping in view, the statement of Respondent no. 2 as she is no more interested to pursue the case further, and the dissolution of marriage vide Decree of Divorce dated 25.05.2011, in the interest of justice, I quash the FIR 182/2010, registered at PS-Kalyan Puri.

7. Though I found force in the submission of ld. APP, however keeping the financial condition of the petitioners into view as all the petitioners are working as labourers, I refrain from imposing cost on them.

8. Crl. M.C. 62/2012 is allowed on the above terms.

9. Dasti.

SURESH KAIT, J

FEBRUARY 01, 2012 Jg