CRL.M.C. 2045/2010 and 2009/2010 Page 1 of 2 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. 2045/2010 and CRL.M.C. 2009/2010 Decided on 02.07.2010 IN THE MATTER OF : PRADEEP SHARMA AND ORS. ..... Petitioners Through: Ms. Meenakshi, Advocate with petitioners No.1 to 5 in person. versus STATE AND ANR. ..... Respondents Through: Mr.U.L. Watwani, APP for the State with IO/ASI Ram Bhav, Police Station: Jahangir Puri. Respondent No.2, Ms. Kalpana alongwith her mother in person. CORAM * HON'BLE MS.JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI 1. Whether Reporters of Local papers may No be allowed to see the Judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? No 3. Whether the judgment should be No reported in the Digest? HIMA KOHLI, J. (Oral) 1. Respondent No.2 is served and is present in Court. She is duly identified by the IO/ASI Ram Bhav. 2. The present petitions have been filed by the petitioners under Section 482 Cr.PC praying inter alia for quashing of FIR No.204/2009 lodged by the respondent No.2, wife of petitioner No.1, registered under Sections 498A/406 IPC and FIR No.234/2008 registered under Section 316/34 IPC at Police Station: Jahangirpuri. Quashing of the FIRs is sought by the petitioners on the basis of a compromise arrived at between the parties CRL.M.C. 2045/2010 and 2009/2010 Page 2 of 2 before the Mediation Centre, Rohini District Court, Delhi on 16.07.2009. In accordance with the terms of the settlement arrived at between the parties, as recorded before the Mediator, the petitioners are liable to pay a sum of Rs.2 lacs to the respondent No.2, which amount has been duly received by the respondent No.2, as confirmed by her in the Court. It is stated by the parties that upon receipt of the aforesaid amount, nothing further is due and payable by the petitioners to the respondent No.2 and that all other disputes pending between the parties also stand settled. It is further stated that the divorce between the parties by mutual consent has duly taken place in terms of the order dated 12.04.2010, passed by the concerned court. 3. The respondent No.2 therefore states that she has no objection to quashing of the aforesaid FIRs. Learned APP for the State also states that in view of the settlement arrived at between the parties, he has no objection to the quashing of the FIRs. 4. There appears no legal impediment in accepting the settlement arrived at between the parties. Accordingly, the Settlement Agreement dated 16.07.2009 is taken on the record. The parties shall remain bound by the terms and conditions thereof. As the parties have arrived at an amicable settlement, no useful purpose shall be served in proceeding further with the FIRs. The same are accordingly quashed alongwith the pending proceedings emanating therefrom. 5. The petitions are disposed of. Files be consigned to the record room. (HIMA KOHLI) JULY 02, 2010 JUDGE rkb