IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI + Crl.M.C.No. 2744/2009 Date of decision: 12th August, 2009 Sanjay Chauhan & Ors. ... Petitioner through: Mr. Nagender Deswal and Mr. Paramjeet Singh, Adv. with petitioners in person VERSUS State & Anr. ....Respondents through: Mr. U.L. Watwani, APP for the state with SI V.P. Kochar Ms. Rina Singh, Adv. for the respondent no. 2 with respondent no. 2 in person CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE GITA MITTAL 1.Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment? 2.To be referred to the Reporter or not? 3.Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? GITA MITTAL, J(Oral) 1. Notice. Mr. U.L.Watwani accepts notice for the respondent no. 1. 2. The petitioners are also present in person. The parties are identified by SI V.P. Kochar, the investigating officer in the case. 3. By this petition, the petitioners have sought quashing of the proceedings arising out of FIR No. 847/2007 registered by the police station Dabri u/s 498A and 406 of the Indian Penal Code. - 2 - 4. It is stated that a marriage was solemnised as per Hindu rites and ceremonies between the petitioner no. 1 and respondent no. 2 on 6th May, 2007 at Delhi. The petitioner nos. 2 and 3 are the parents of the petitioner no. 1 while petitioner nos. 4 and 5 are his brothers. On account of differences between the petitioners and the respondent no. 2, she started living separately from them since 20th July, 2007. A complaint was also lodged by the respondent no.2 which was registered as FIR No. 847/07 by the police station Dabri Colony u/s 498A/406 of the Indian Penal Code. On completion of investigation, a charge sheet stands filed and the case is stated to be pending in the court of Ms. Rekha, MM, Delhi. 5. It is stated by the petitioners on the one hand and the respondent no. 2 on the other that during the pendency of the case on account of the intervention of relatives and friends, an amicable settlement has resulted. The same was reduced to writing on 30th May, 2009 copy whereof has been filed on record. The parties have seen the copy of the settlement in court and have confirmed that the same was entered into by them. 6. It is submitted by the petitioners and the respondent no. 2 that the terms of the settlement have already been effectuated. It is stated by the parties that in terms of the settlement, the petitioner no. - 3 - 1 had agreed to pay an amount of Rs.50,000/- in full and final settlement of all claims of stridhan, maintenance and permanent alimony to the respondent no. 2. Articles of stridhan of the respondent no. 2 are also stated to have been returned to her. 7. So far as the payment of the amount is concerned, the same was payable by four instalments. Two of the instalments are stated to have been paid in the proceedings u/s 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act and one instalment stands paid before the learned Metropolitan Magistrate at the time of withdrawl of the petition under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act by the petitioner no. 1 to the respondent no. 2. 8. The fourth instalment of Rs.12,500/- has been paid in cash by the petitioners to the respondent no. 2 in court. The respondent no. 2 has stated that having received the full amount of Rs.50,000/- she has no other or further claims upon the petitioners or their relatives. 9. It is further stated by the parties that the marriage between the petitioner no. 1 and the respondent no. 2 stands dissolved by a decree of divorce by mutual consent dated 30th July, 2009. The petitioners have contended that in view thereof, they have no other or further claim of any kind against the respondent no. 2 or any of her relatives. - 4 - 10. The petitioners and the respondent no. 2 have jointly prayed that in view of the settlement arrived at and bearing in mind that the petitioner no. 1 and respondent no. 2 are young persons and wish to start life afresh, the proceedings arising out of the complaint which was lodged by the respondent no. 2 resulting in registration of FIR be quashed. 11. I have considered the prayers made by the parties. In the aforenoticed facts it remains no manner of doubt that the proceedings were initiated on a complaint lodged by the respondent no. 2 arising out of matrimonial disputes and differences. The disputes were of a private nature. During the pendency of the proceedings, the parties have arrived at a mutual settlement and have agreed to settle all their disputes and difference finally. Respondent no. 2 has received an amount towards her claims of maintenance and alimony and the relationship between the petitioners on the one hand and the respondent no. 2 stand snapped by the decree of divorce. The request of the petitioners that they be permitted therefore to get on in life without the interdiction of the criminal prosecution deserves to be accepted. The same would be in the interest of justice as well as societal interest having regard to the young ages of the petitioner no. 1 and the respondent no. 2. - 5 - 12. In this view of the matter, it is directed that all proceedings arising out of the FIR No. 847/2007 registered by the police station Dabri u/s 498A and 406 of the Indian Penal Code shall stand quashed. This petition is allowed in the above terms. Dasti to parties. August 12, 2009 Gita Mittal, J. kr