Crl.M.C.No.3988/2011 Page 1 of 3 $~20 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. No. 3988/2011 % Judgment delivered on: 02nd December, 2011 SANDEEP PURI & ANR ..... Petitioner Through : Mr.Yogesh Chhabra , Adv. versus STATE & ANR ..... Respondent Through : Ms.Rajdipa Behura, APP for State /Respondent no.1 with SI Ram Pratap, police station Moti Nagar in person. Respondent No.2 in person. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT SURESH KAIT, J. (Oral) Crl.M.A.No.18742/2011(exemption) Exemption is allowed subject to just exceptions. Criminal M.A. stands disposed of. + CRL.M.C. 3988/2011 1. Notice issued. 2. Ms.Rajdipa Behura, learned APP on behalf of State/ respondent No.1 and respondent No.2 who is present in person, accepts notice. Crl.M.C.No.3988/2011 Page 2 of 3 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that vide FIR No.134/2007 dated 01.03.2007, Delhi a case under Section 498A/406/34 Indian Penal Code, 1860 was registered against the petitioners on the complaint of respondent No.2, at Police Station Moti Nagar, Delhi. 4. He further submitted that vide settlement dated 11.07.20011, the settlement arrived at between respondent No.2 and petitioners. Pursuant thereto, parties have amicably dissolved their marriage by mutual divorce decree dated 23.08.2011. 5. Learned counsel for petitioners submitted that petitioner No.1 has agreed to pay a sum of ` 50,000/- as total amount to respondent No.2 towards maintenance (present, past and future) and permanent alimony etc. An amount of ` 40,000/- has already been paid to respondent No.2 by way of demand draft and the balance amount of ` 10,000/- has been paid to respondent No.2 today in cash which has been accepted without any protest. 6. Respondent No.2 present in the Court in person and submits the photocopy of her voter identity card which has been placed at page No.40 of the petition for identity. The election identity card bearing No.SZM0831909 issued by Election Commission of India stands in the name of respondent No.2. She submits that all the issues qua the aforesaid FIR have been settled and she does not wish to pursue the present case against the petitioners. She has no objection, if the present FIR is quashed. Crl.M.C.No.3988/2011 Page 3 of 3 7. On the other hand, Ms.Rajdipa Behura, learned APP submits that on completion of investigation charge-sheet has been filed before learned Trial Court and after framing of charge, matter is pending for recording prosecution evidence. 8. She further submitted that if this Court is inclined to quash the FIR. Then, heavy costs should be imposed on the petitioners as by this process, they have pressed the government machinery and consumed the precious time of the Court. 9. Keeping the settlement between the parties and statement of respondent No.2 into view, FIR No.134/2007 registered at police station Moti Nagar and the petitioners and the proceedings emanating thereto are hereby quashed. 10. Though, I find force in the submission of learned APP, but keeping the financial position of the petitioners into view, no costs is imposed upon the petitioners. 11. Accordingly, Criminal M.C.No.3988/2011 is allowed and stands disposed of. 12. Dasti. SURESH KAIT, J DECEMBER 02, 2011 Mk