Crl.M.C.No.2267/2008 Page 1 of 3 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + Crl.M.C. No.2267/2008 % Date of Decision: 21.07.2008 Pavneet Bhasin & Others ….. Petitioners Through: Mr.Vineet Aggarwal, Advocate for petitioners along with petitioner No.1 in person. Versus The State (NCT of Delhi) & Another …. Respondents Through: Mr.Amit Sharma, APP for the State along with SI K.P. Singh, Police Station Punjabi Bagh. Mr.Sanjeev Mahajan, Advocate for respondent No.2 along with respondent No.2 in person. CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR 1. Whether reporters of Local papers may YES be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the reporter or not? NO 3. Whether the judgment should be reported NO in the Digest? Anil Kumar, J. * + Crl.M.A. No.8486/2008 in Crl.M.C.No.2267/2008 Allowed, subject to just exceptions. The application is disposed of. Crl.M.C.No.2267/2008 Page 2 of 3 Crl.M.C.No.2267/2008 & Crl.M.A. No.8845/2008 Petitioner No.1, husband, and respondent No.2, wife, and their counsel contend that the disputes between the parties have been settled before Delhi High Court Mediation and Conciliation Centre. Pursuant to the same, the marriage between the parties had been dissolved by a decree dated 16th July, 2008 under Section 13(B) of Hindu Marriage Act by mutual consent. Under the settlement, the husband has agreed to pay Rs.32.00 lakh in full and final settlement of all the claims towards permanent alimony and maintenance for respondent No.2 and for the maintenance of the minor son of the parties, namely, Master Raunit Bhasin. An amount of Rs.20.00 lakh has already been paid and the balance amount of Rs.12.00 lakh has been given in the court today by demand draft bearing No.985271 dated 14.07.2008 amounting to Rs.6.00 lakh in favour of Ms.Sonia drawn on Vijaya Bank, New Delhi, and another demand draft bearing No.73512 dated 14th July, 2007 for a sum of Rs.6.00 lakh in favour of Master Raunit Singh Bhasin u/g Mrs.Sonia Bhasin drawn on Standard Chartered Bank, B-68, G.K. Part I, New Delhi-110048. The counsel for the parties contend that no fruitful purpose shall be served by continuing the proceedings pursuant to FIR No.463/2006 under Section 406/498A/34 of IPC registered at Police Station Punjabi Bagh. Crl.M.C.No.2267/2008 Page 3 of 3 Let the statement of respondent No.2 be recorded. Respondent No.2 is identified by her counsel. Statement of respondent No.2 has been recorded. The marriage between the parties has already been dissolved. The parties have arrived at a settlement and the terms of the settlement have already been complied with. The settlement arrived at between the parties also seems to be in the interest of minor son of the parties, Master Raunit Bhasin. No fruitful purpose shall be served in continuing the proceedings pursuant to FIR No.463/2006 under Section 406/498A/34 of IPC registered at Police Station Punjabi Bagh, which was registered at the instance of respondent No.2, wife. It shall also be in the interest of justice, if these proceedings are quashed. In the facts and totality of circumstances, FIR No.463/2006 under Section 406/498A/34 of IPC registered at Police Station Punjabi Bagh and all the proceedings emanating therefrom against the petitioners are, therefore, quashed. The petition and the application are disposed of. Dasti. July 21, 2008 ANIL KUMAR, J. ‘Dev’