37 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. 456/2011 & CrLM.A. No.1764/2011 MADAN LAL & ORS. Petitioners Through : Mr. P.K. Srivastava, Adv. with petitioners in person. versus STATE NCT OF DELHI & ORS. Respondents Through : l^lr. Navin Sharma, APP for R-1 to 3 Ms. i^anju Gupta, Adv. for R-4/complainant with respondent No.4/complainant in person. CORAIVI: HON'BLE I^S. JUSTICE HII^IA KOHLI ORDER % 11.02.2011 1. The present petition is filed by the petitioners under Article 227 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 Cr.P.C. praying inter alia for quashing of FIR No.42/2009 lodged by respondent No.4/complainant, against her husband, petitioner No.l, and his family members, petitioners No.2 to 4, under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC, registered with PS Anand Parbat, Delhi and all proceedings arising therefrom. 2. Counsel for the petitioners states that the marriage of petitioner No.l and respondent No.4/complainant was solemnized on 3.2.2007. However, there is no issue born from out of the wedlock. Thereafter, due to certain disputes and differences which arose between petitioner CRL.M.C. 456/2011 Page 1 of 4 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 No.l and respondent No.4/connplainant, they started living separately in September, 2008, after which the aforesaid complaint was lodged by respondent No.4/complainant against the petitioners in March, 2009. 3. It is stated that during the pendency of the aforesaid litigation, the parties have arrived at a settlement, terms and conditions of which are recorded in the Mutual Settlement dated 3.4.2010 (pages 19 to 22). In terms of the settlement, it is agreed that a sum of ?1,20,000/- shall be paid by petitioner No.l to respondent No.4/complainant in full and final settlement of all her claims against the petitioners. 4. Counsel for the petitioners states that a sum of ?90,000/- has already been paid to respondent No.4/complainant in installments paid from time to time, and as agreed upon, he has brought the remaining sum of ?30,000/-, which amount he hands over to respondent No.4/complainant, through counsel. He further states pursuant to the parties approaching the concerned court for grant of divorce by mutual consent, a decree of divorce dated 9.11.2010 has been passed, copy of which is enclosed with the petition at page 23. He therefore states that the aforesaid FIR may be quashed. 5. Respondent No.4/complainant, who is present in Court and is duly represented through counsel, confirms the aforesaid position. CRL.M.C. 456/2011 Page 2 of 4 She confirms having received the entire sum of ^1,20,000/- from petitioner No.l, as agreed upon by the parties in terms of the aforesaid settlement arrived at between them. She states that she has arrived at the aforesaid settlement with the petitioners of her own free will and volition and without any undue influence or coercion from any quarter. She further states that in view of the aforesaid settlement arrived at with the petitioners, she does not wish to proceed further with the FIR lodged by her, and has no objection to the same being quashed. 6. Learned APP for the State confirms the fact that the parties have arrived at a settlement and now are living separately. He, therefore, does not oppose the prayer made in the present petition. 7. This Court has heard counsels for the parties. In view of the submission made by respondent No.4/complainant and in view of the fact that the parties have arrived at a settlement of their own free will and volition and without any undue influence or coercion from any quarter and as now they are living separately, no useful purpose will be served by proceeding further with the aforesaid FIR and the proceedings arising therefrom. 8. Accordingly, the prayer made in the petition is allowed and FIR No. 42/2009 lodged by the respondent No.4/complainant with PS CRL.M.C. 456/2011 Page 3 of 4 Anand Parbat, Delhi and all proceedings arising therefrom are quashed. 9. The petition is disposed of along with the pending application. File be consigned to the record room. FEBRUARY 11, 2011 sk CRL.M.C. 456/2011 HIMA KOHLI,J Page 4 of 4