f)_. $rv1 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. 2810/2011 INDER RAJ CHADDHA & ANR. .. ... Petitioners Through Mr. Abhimanyu Devraj, Adv. with petitioners in person. versus STATE & AN R. .. ... Respondents CORAM: Through Mr. Naveen Sharma, APP with SI Hansa Ram, PS Rajori Garden. Mr. Vinod Kumar Sharma with Mr. Manoj Kumar, Advs. for R-2/complainant. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.K. SHALl ORDER 0/o 15.09.2011 1. This is a petition for quashing of FIR No.394/2001 u/S 498A/406/34 IPC registered by P.S. Rajori Garden, New Delhi in respect of which investigation is still pending before the learned M.M, Tis Hazari Courts. 2. The ground for quashing of the FIR is that the petitioner < no.l/husband has settled all his matrimonial disputes with the respondent no.2/wifejcomplainant. 3. As a consequence of the said settlement, a decree of divorce has been obtained from the Competent Court on 14.2.2011. A copy of the said decree passed by Sh. Kamlesh Kumar, Additional Principal Judge, Family Courts, Rohini, Delhi has been placed on record. I' ,.-! I ..,. Digitally Signed By:AMULYA Certify that the digital file and physical file have been compared and the digital data is as per the physical file and no page is missing. Signature Not Verified 3 4. It is further stated that a sum of Rs.2,75,000/- was paid to the complainant towards the full and final settlement of her entire cia i ms on account of permanent a I i many, dowry articles etc .. Out of the total amount, a sum of Rs.1,75,000/- has already been paid to the respondent no.2/complainant by the petitioner no.l during the first motion and the balance amount of Rs.l lac has been paid to the complainant by way of bank draft today in the Court. 5. The petition is supported by the affidavits of the petitioner no.l-Inder Raj Chaddha as well as the respondent no.2-Geeta Sabharwal. Both are present in the Court today and are duly identified by their respective counsel as well as by the concerned I.O. 6. Having regard to the aforesaid fact that the petitioner no.l and the respondent no.2jcomplainant have been divorced on the basis of mutual consent by the Competent Court, I am of the view that no useful purpose would be served by keeping the investigation in respect of the aforesaid FIR pending. 7. Accordingly, FIR No. 394/2001 u/S 498A/406/34 IPC registered by P.S. Rajouri Garden and the consequent investigations carried out by the local police are quashed. 8. No order as to costs. SEPTEMBER 15, 2011 KA ?- V.K. SHALI,l I ( '· I ! 7, " ! t I