CRL.M.C. 2487/2010 Page 1 of 3 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. 2487/2010 Decided on 05.08.2010 IN THE MATTER OF : PRAMOD BHATIA AND ORS. ..... Petitioners Through: Ms. Geeta, Advocate with petitioners No.1 and 2 in person. versus STATE AND ANR. ..... Respondents Through: Mrs. S. Kohli, APP for the State Respondent No.2 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. The present petition is filed by the petitioners under Section 482 of the Cr.PC praying inter alia for quashing of FIR No.5/2008, lodged by respondent No.2, the wife of petitioner No.1 and daughter-in-law of petitioner No.2 under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC, registered with Police Station: Hari Nagar. 2. It is stated in the petition that the marriage of petitioner No.1 and respondent No.2 was solemnised on 02.04.2001. There is no child from out of the wedlock. Due to irreconcilable differences, the parties are living separately since 03.08.2007. Initially, petitioner No.1 filed a petition under CRL.M.C. 2487/2010 Page 2 of 3 Section 13(1)(i)(a) of the Hindu Marriage Act in September, 2007. However, subsequently the parties arrived at a settlement in terms of which they filed a joint petition for seeking divorce by mutual consent, which was allowed vide judgment and decree dated 26.03.2010. Prior to the joint petition filed for divorce by mutual consent, in the proceedings initiated by petitioner No.1 for divorce against the respondent No.2, with the intervention of the Court, the parties arrived at a negotiated settlement in terms of which, it was agreed that apart from the sum of Rs.2 lacs paid by the petitioners to the respondent No.2 at the time, when they applied for seeking regular bail from the concerned Court, the petitioners shall pay a sum of Rs.1,05,000/- to the respondent No.2 as full and final settlement of all her claims against them. While a sum of Rs.55,000/- is stated to have been paid before the learned Principal Judge, Family Courts, as recorded in the order dated 26.03.2010, a demand draft for a sum of Rs.50,000/- bearing No.284329 dated 07.07.2010 drawn on Punjab & Sindh Bank, Moti Nagar Branch, in favour of respondent No.2 is handed over by the counsel for the petitioners to the respondent No.2. 3. Respondent No.2, who is present in Court and identified by the counsel for the petitioners, states that she has no further claim left against the petitioners and has no objection to quashing of the aforesaid FIR as all disputes between the parties stand amicably settled. Learned APP for the State also states that in view of the settlement arrived at between the parties, she has no objection to the prayer made in the present petition being allowed. CRL.M.C. 2487/2010 Page 3 of 3 4. This Court has perused the petition and the documents placed on the record and has also interacted with the parties, who are present in Court. There appears no legal impediment in accepting the settlement, which appears to have been arrived at between the parties voluntarily and without any pressure. The parties shall remain bound by the terms and conditions thereof. No useful purpose shall be served by continuing with the FIR in view of the aforesaid position. The present petition is accordingly allowed. FIR No.5/2008 and all the proceedings arising therefrom, stand quashed. 5. The petition is disposed of. File be consigned to the record room. (HIMA KOHLI) AUGUST 05, 2010 JUDGE rkb