Delhi High Court
Sudip Bhattacharya vs State Of Delhi on 26 March, 2012
Author: Suresh Kait
$~31
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CRL.M.C. No.1044/2012
% Judgment delivered on: March 26, 2012
SUDIP BHATTACHARYA ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Hasan Anzar and Mr.
Naushad Akhter, Advocates
versus
STATE OF DELHI ..... Respondent
Through: Mr. Navin Sharma, APP
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT
SURESH KAIT, J. (Oral)
Crl. M.A. 3698/2012
Exemption allowed, subject to just exceptions.
The application stands disposed of.
CRL.M.C. 1044/2012
1. Notice issued.
2. Learned APP accepts notice on behalf of the State. Ms.
Wendrilla Roy, respondent No.2 is personally present in the Court.
3. With the consent of the parties, the instant petition is taken up
for final disposal.
4. Vide the instant petition, the petitioner has sought quashing of
FIR No. 54 dated 19.02.2010 registered under Sec. 498-A/406/34 IPC
with PS Madhu Vihar against the petitioner on the complaint of
respondent No.2.
5. Learned counsel further submits that the matter has been settled
between the petitioner and respondent No.2 and therefore, the same has
been recorded vide order dated 28.4.2011 by the co-ordinate Bench of
this Court.
6. Learned counsel further submits that pursuant to the said
settlement, the marriage between the petitioner and respondent No.2
has been dissolved by a decree of divorce dated 03.12.2011 by mutual
consent.
7. It is further submitted that and amount of Rs.5.25 lac has already
been received by respondent No.2 and today Rs.75,000/- is being paid
in the Court vide DD No. 205114 drawn on ICICI in favour of
respondent No.2, thus, respondent No.2 has received the totl settlement
amount, therefore, she is no more interested in pursuing the matter. In
the facts and circumstances, the instant petition may be allowed.
8. Respondent No.2 is personally present in Court. SI Sandeep
Kumar I.O. of the case also, present in the Court, who identified her as
respondent No.2. She submits that she does not rebut the contention of
learned counsel for the petitioner and is no more interested in pursuing
the case. She has received the entire settlement amount i.e., Rs.6 lac,
therefore, she has no objection if the FIR mentioned above and the
emanating proceedings are quashed.
9. Learned APP on the other hand submits that charge sheet has
been filed and charge is yet to be framed against the petitioner. He
submits that If this court is inclined to quash the FIR, some cost may
be imposed on the petitioner as, in the process, Govt. machinery has
been pressed into and precious public time the Court has been
consumed.
10. Keeping in view, the settlement arrived between parties and the
settlement amount has been received by respondent no.2, dissolution of
marriage between the parties and the statement of respondent no.2 who
is no more interested to pursue the case further, therefore in the interest
of justice, I hereby quash the FIR No. 54/2010 registered at PS Madhu
Vihar with the emanating proceedings thereto.
11. I find force in the submission of learned APP for imposing cost.
12. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, on
instructions, submits that he is willing to contribute some amount of
money for the welfare purposes, as he is getting Rs.60,000/- per month
as salary.
13. Accordingly, I direct him to pay Rs.25,000/- in favour of
'Indigent and Disabled Lawyers', Bar Council of Delhi within two
weeks from today. Proof of payment shall also be placed on record.
SURESH KAIT, J
MARCH 26, 2012
'raj'
