Shiv Kumar & Ors. vs State & Ors.
2012 Latest Caselaw 2130 Del

$~11
*    IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+      CRL.M.C. 430/2012

%              Judgment delivered on:28th March, 2012


       SHIV KUMAR & ORS.                  ..... Petitioner
                    Through : Mr. Amit Dabas, Adv.

                      versus


       STATE & ORS.                                  ..... Respondents
                               Through : Ms. Rajdipa Behura, APP for State.
                               Mr. R.S. Sharma, Adv. for R2.


CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT

SURESH KAIT, J. (Oral)

1 Vide the instant petition, the petitioners have sought quashing of FIR No. 361 dated 15.06.2002 registered at P.S. Model Town, under Sections 498A/406/34 Indian Penal Code, 1860 and all the consequential proceedings emanating therefrom against the petitioners on the complaint of respondent No.2/complainant.

2 Further submits that vide Settlement dated 24.08.2009, respondent No.2/complainant has settled all the issues qua the above mentioned FIR against the petitioners for a total sum of Rs.1,72,500/-.

3 Further submits that vide an exparte decree, divorce has been granted

in favour of respondent No.2.

4 Respondent No.2 is present in court with her parents namely Mr.Netrapal Singh and Smt. Girish Devi, father and mother respectively. She has been duly identified by Mr. R.S. Sharma, Advocate.

5 Ld. counsel for respondent No.2 on instructions submits that she has settled all the issues qua the above mentioned FIR and has received entire settlement amount, therefore, she is no more interested to pursue the case. She has no objection if the FIR is quashed.

6 Ld. APP for State on the other hand submits that the Charge-sheet has been filed in the trial court and charges have been framed and matter is pending for Prosecution Evidence.

7 Learned APP further submits that if this court is inclined to quash the FIR in the present case, then heavy costs may be imposed upon the petitioners as in the process, the government machinery has been pressed into and precious public time has been consumed.

8 Though I find force in the submissions made by ld. APP for State on costs, but keeping in view the poor financial conditions of the petitioners and facts of the case, I refrain imposing costs upon them.

9 Keeping in view the above discussion, statement of respondent No.2 and grant of ex-parte divorce in her favour, into view and in the interest of justice, I quash FIR No. 361/2002 registered at P.S. Model Town, Delhi and all the proceedings emanating therefrom.

10 Accordingly, Crl. M.C. 430/2012 disposed of on above terms.

11. Dasti.

SURESH KAIT, J

MARCH 28, 2012 j