$rv39 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. 3282/2011 0/o SACHIN DUGGAL & ORS Through versus STATE & ANR Through CORAM: ..... Petitioners Ms. Purnima Maheshwari and Mr. D. K. Singh, Advocates ..... Respondents Mr. Naveen Sharma, APP for the State Mr. Ashish S. Kulshrestha, Advocate for R-2 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.K. SHALl ORDER 29.09.2011 1. This is a petition for quashing of FIR no.344/2010, u/S 498A/406/34 IPC registered by P.S. Shalimar Bagh in respect of which charge sheet is yet to be filed. 2. The ground for quashing of the aforesaid FIR is that the petitioner no.1 has settled all his matrimonial disputes with the respondent no.2/Ms.Bhawna Sindhwani. It is further stated that in pursuance to the said compromise a decree of divorce has been obtained from the family Court, Dwarka Courts, New Delhi lc -C Digitally Signed By:AMULYA Certify that the digital file and physical file have been compared and the digital data is as per the physical file and no page is missing. Signature Not Verified 7-- on 24.09.2011. It has also been stated that in terms of the settlement between the parties, the petitioner no.1 was to pay a sum of Rs.22,50,000/- to the respondent no.2/complainant in a staggered manner at different stages, towards the full and final settlement of her entire claim. It has been contended by the learned counsel for the petitioners that a sum of Rs.15,00,000/- has already been paid to the respondent no.2/complainant by way of two installments of Rs.7,50,000/- each on the first motion and the second motion before the Family Court and so far as the balance amount of Rs.7,50,000/- is concerned the same is being paid to the respondent no.2 today, in Court at the --,-! time of quashing of the FIR. The petition is supported by affidavits of all the petitioners who are also present in the Court and who have been identified by their counsel. 3. Respondent no.2 is also present along with her counsel. She has I also filed an affidavit supporting the averments made in the petition. On an oral inquiry, the respondent No.2 has stated that she has no objection to the quashing of the aforesaid FIR as the matrimonial dispute between the parties has been settled. A bankers cheque for sum of Rs.7,50,000/- drawn on Allahabad Bank, Parliament Street, New Delhi -110001 has been paid to the respondent ho.2 towards the balance amount. The learned --'-l, ) counsel for the respondent no.2 further stated since the parties have settled the matter therefore certain dowry articles which were seized by the Police may be permitted to be taken by the respondent no.2. Learned counsel for the petitioners has stated that she has no objection to the release of the articles which were seized by police, to the respondent no.2. 4. Learned APP has stated that State does not have any objection to the quashing of the aforesaid FIR and the consequent investigation in view of the settlement between both the parties. 4. Having regard to the aforesaid facts of the case, I feel that no useful purpose will be served by keeping the aforesaid FIR and the consequent proceedings pending against the present petitioners. Accordingly, FIR no.344/2010, u/S 498A/406/34 IPC registered by P.S. Shalimar Bagh and the consequent investigation being carried out by the Local Police are quashed. So, the articles which were seized by the Police, they may be released to the complainant. V.K. SHALI,J SEPTEMBER 29, 2011 B -·-c. \ "' \ --!.. ___.'. L;.. I :-' -:-!