Delhi High Court
Narinderjit Singh Lamba & Anr vs State & Anr on 16 March, 2012
Author: Suresh Kait
$~60
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CRL.M.C. No.943/2012
% Judgment delivered on: 16th March, 2012
NARINDERJIT SINGH LAMBA & ANR. .....Petitioners
Through : Mr. Rajiv K. Garg and
Mr.Ashish Garg, Advocates
versus
STATE & ANR. ..... Respondents
Through : Mr. Navin Sharma, APP
Mr. Aseem Malhotra, Advocate
for R-2
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT
SURESH KAIT, J. (Oral)
Crl.M.A. 3300/2012
Exemption allowed, subject to just exceptions.
The application stands disposed of.
CRL.M.C. No.943/2012
1. Notice issued.
2. Learned APP on behalf of the State accepts notice. Learned
counsel named above accepts notice on behalf of R-2.
3. With the consent of the parties, the instant petition is taken up
for final disposal.
4. Vide FIR No. 104/2005 dated 5.7.2005 at PS Rajinder Nagar a
case was registered for offence punishable under Sections 406/498-
A/34 Indian Penal Code, 1860 on the complaint of respondent No.2,
against the petitioners.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that thereafter, a
settlement arrived between the parties and respondent No.2 has settled
all the issues qua the aforesaid FIR against both the petitioners. Vide
the settlement mentioned above, petitioner No.1 agreed to pay Rs. 15
lac in total in lieu of her all claims to respondent No.2. Total settlement
amount has been received by respondent No.2, except a balance of
Rs.3.75 lac which is being paid today in the Court vide DD No.108801
dated 15.03.2012 drawn on Axis Bank, Rajouri Garden for and amount
of Rs. 3.75 lac favouring respondent No.2, which is handed over to
respondent No.2 in the Court.
6. Learned counsel further submits that in pursuance of the
settlement mentioned above, the marriage between the petitioner No.1
and respondent No.2 has been dissolved by mutual consent vide decree
of divorce dated 21.12.2011, therefore respondent No.2 is no more
interested to pursue the case any further against the petitioners.
7. Respondent No.2 is personally present in the Court with her
counsel Mr. Aseem Malhotra, Advocate. On instructions, learned
counsel submits that he does not dispute what is stated by learned
counsel for the petitioner; respondent No.2 has received the entire
settlement amount and is no more interested to pursue the case further.
The marriage between petitioner No.1 and respondent No.2 has also
been dissolved, therefore, if the FIR in question and the proceedings
emanating therefrom are quashed, respondent No.2 has no objection.
8. Learned APP on the other hand submits that charge sheet has
already been filed and charges have been framed against the petitioners
and the matter is pending for prosecution evidence. He further submits
that if this Court is inclined to quash the FIR and the emanating
proceedings, heavy cost may be imposed on the petitioners as in the
process government machinery has been pressed into and precious
public time has been consumed.
9. Keeping in view the settlement, statement of respondent No.2,
dissolution of marriage and in the interest of justice, FIR No. 104/2005
registered at PS Rajinder Nagar and the proceedings emanating
therefrom are hereby quashed.
10. I, finding force in the submission of learned APP regarding
costs, I, hereby impose cost of Rs. 25,000/- on petitioner No.1 to be
paid in favour of Indigent and Disabled Lawyers' Account, Bar
Council of Delhi within two weeks from today. Proof of same be also
placed on record.
11. Crl.M.C.943/2012 is allowed and disposed of in above terms.
12. Order dasti.
SURESH KAIT, J
MARCH 16, 2012
'raj'
