Munna Khan & Ors vs State & Ors.
2012 Latest Caselaw 768 Del

$~20
*    IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+            CRL.M.C.No.4385/2011

%            Judgment delivered on: 03rd February, 2012

MUNNA KHAN & ORS                                           ..... Petitioner
                              Through : Mr.Vishwanath Pratap Singh,
                              Mr.A. Kr Sharma, & Mr. Ankit Gupta, Advs.

                     versus

STATE & ORS.                                             ..... Respondents
                              Through : Mr.Satish Mishra, Adv for
                              Ms.Rajdipa Behura, APP for State/R-1 with
                              SI Ram Niwas, CAW Cell, North-East
                              District, Delhi in person.
                              Mr.Abdul Rauf, Adv for R-2 with respondent
                              in person.


CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT

SURESH KAIT, J. (Oral)

1. Learned counsel for petitioners submit that vide FIR No.217/2005 dated 31.05.2005 a case under Section 498A/406/34 Indian Penal Code, 1860 was registered against the petitioners at police station Mansarover Park, Delhi on the complaint of respondent No.2.

2. He further submitted that vide settlement dated 09.06.2011, between the parties arrived at Delhi Mediation Centre, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi, the petitioner No.1 had agreed to pay ` 20,000/- to the

respondent No.2/complainant as full and final settlement. Out of which an amount of ` 10,000/- had already been paid to her and cash amount of ` 10,000/- is being paid to her today in the Court. Same has been accepted by respondent No.2 without any protest.

3. Learned counsel for petitioners further submitted that consequent to the settlement, marriage between the petitioner No.1 & respondent No.2 has been dissolved by traditional Talaaq under the Muslim laws.

4. Respondent No.2 present in the Court with her counsel Mr.Abdul Rauf, who duly identifies her as respondent No.2. In addition, she has also been identified by IO of the case SI Ram Niwas.

5. On instructions, learned counsel for respondent No.2 submits that she has settled all the disputes qua the aforementioned FIR with the petitioners and marriage between respondent No.2 and petitioner No.1 has already been dissolved. Therefore, she is no more interested in pursuing her case against the petitioners, and if the aforementioned FIR is quashed, she has no objection.

6. On the other hand, Mr.Satish Mishra, learned counsel on behalf of Ms.Rajdipa Behura, learned APP for State, on instructions submits that consequent to filing of the charge-sheet against the petitioners, cognizance has already been taken by learned Trial Court and matter is pending for framing of charge.

7. Further he submits that if this Court is inclined to quash the aforementioned FIR, petitioners may be put to some terms, as in this

process, government machinery has been pressed into and precious public time has been consumed.

8. Keeping the above discussion into view and the facts that marriage of petitioner No.1 and respondent No.2 had already been dissolved and she is no more interested in pursuing her case, in the interest of justice, FIR No.217/2005 registered against the petitioners at police station Mansarover Park, Delhi and proceedings emanating thereto are hereby quashed.

9. Though, I find force in the submission of learned counsel for State, regarding putting the petitioners to terms, however, as petitioners are from lower strata of society, I refrain in imposing any costs upon them.

10. Accordingly, Criminal M.C.No.4385/2011 is allowed and stands disposed of.

11. Dasti.

SURESH KAIT, J FEBRUARY 03, 2012 Mk