97# $~ ^ IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. 1603/2011 WARREN JONATHAN & ORS. Petitioners Through: Mr. K.S. Bhati and Meenakshi Mohan, Advocate with Petitioners in person. versus STATE & ANR. Respondents Through: Mr. Manoj Ohri, APP for the State with SI Ranbir Singh, PS Muldierjee Nagar, Delhi. Mr. Rajiv Bajaj, Advocate for Respondent No. 2 with Respondent No. 2 in person. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA ORDER % 18.05.2011 CrI. M.A. No. 5890/2011 (Exemption) Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. CRL.M.C. 1603/2011 This is a petition for quashing of FIR No. 226/2010 under Sections 498A/406IPG registered at PS MuldierjeeNagar, Delhi. The Complainant/RespondentNo. 2 Ms. Veronica Michael is present inpersonand is identifiedby her counseland the InvestigatingOfficer. She states that Petitioner No. 1 and Respondent No. 3 were married as per the CRL.M.C. 1603/2011 Page 1 of 3 Signing Date:29.08.2024 17:09:50 Certify that the digital and physical file have been compared and the digital data is as per the physical file and no page is missing. Signature Not Verified Christian Rites and Ceremonies at Delhi. She states that the Petitioners and Respondent No.2/Complainant have entered into a Compromise and in terms of the settlement the Petitioner No.l and Respondent No. 2 are seeking divorce by mutual consent as per the Indian Divorce Act. In terms of the settlement, the first motion of divorce by mutual consent has already been granted and the second motion of divorce by mutual is pending and is listed for today, that is, IS^*" May, 2011. As full and final settlementof all the claims of the Respondent No. 2, the Petitioner No. 1 has to pay laldis out of which ^3 lakhs have already been paid to her and ?2 lakhs will be paid to her today at the time of recording of statement under the Second Motion petition for divorce by mutual consent. She further states that in view of the settlement between the parties, she does not want to pursue the abovementioned FIR and the proceedings pursuant thereto. In view of the fact that the parties have amicably resolved their differences of their own free will and without any coercion and no useful purpose will be served in continuance of the proceedings, rather the same would create further acrimony between them, it would be appropriate to quashthe abovementionedFIR and the proceedingspursuant thereto. CRL.M.C. 1603/2011 Page 2 of3 Consequently, FIR No. 226/2010 under Sections 498A/406 IPG registered at PS Mukherjee Nagar, Delhi and proceedings pursuant thereto are hereby quashed. Parties have signed this order sheet in acknowledgment of their statements before this Court. The petition is disposed of. Order dasti. MUKTA GUPTA, J. MAY 18, 2011 'vn' 1 CRL.M.C. 1603/2011 ^ 3