AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
23 paragraphs · 378 wordsSuresh Kait, J.—Notice issued.
Ms.Rajdipa Behura, learned APP on behalf of respondent No.1/State and Mr.Sanjeev Kumar, Learned Counsel on behalf of respondent No.2
accept notice.
Learned Counsel for petitioners stated that vide FIR No.118/2010 dated 09.06.2010 case u/s 498A/406/34 Indian Penal Code, 1860 was
registered against the petitioners on the complaint of respondent No.2 at police station Nihal Vihar, Delhi.
It is further stated that the matter has been settled at Mediation Centre, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi on 18.06.2010 for a total payment of Rs.
2,50,000/- . Pursuant to the settlement, marriage between the petitioner No.1 and respondent No.2 has been dissolved by mutual consent divorce
decree dated 28.05.2011.
Learned Counsel for petitioner submits that out of the total settled amount of Rs. 2,50,000/- , an amount of Rs. 2,25,000/- has already been
paid to respondent No.2 and petitioner has made payment today by draft bearing No.152638 drawn on Inderprastha Sehkari Bank, dated
19.12.2011 for Rs. 25,000/- in favour of respondent No.2.
Respondent No.2 personally present in the Court with her Learned Counsel Mr.Sanjeev Kumar, who has duly identified her as respondent
No.2. In addition, ASI Subey Singh from police station Nihal Vihar also identifies her.
Respondent No.2 does not refute the contention of Learned Counsel for petitioners and submits that present FIR may be quashed and she has
no objection thereto.
Learned APP on instructions submits that matter is pending investigation and if this Court is inclined to quash the FIR, heavy costs may be
imposed upon the petitioners as the government machinery has been put to action and precious time of the Court has been used.
Considering the settlement between the parties, dissolution of marriage between petitioner No.1 and respondent No.2 and the fact that
respondent No.2 does not wish to pursue her case, in the interest of justice, FIR No.118/2010 registered against the petitioners at police station
Nihal Vihar, Delhi is hereby quashed.
Though, I find force in the submission of learned APP, yet considering the vocation of petitioner No.1 i.e. driver on meagre salary and the fact
that petitioner No.2 is a ''house-maker'' having no source of income, no costs is being imposed upon them.
Accordingly, Criminal M.C.No.4339/2011 is allowed and stands disposed of.