HIGH COURT OF DELHI : NEW DELHI Date of hearing and Order: February 10, 2010 + CrI. M.C. No. 4056 of 2009 % V. Balram Krishna & others ... Petitioners Through: jvir. Raj Kumar, Advocate versus The State, NCT of Delhi & Anr. ... Respondents Through: Mr. Amit Sharma, Additional Public Prosecutor for State with SI Jassa Singh. Mr. N.M. Popli, Advocate for respondent No.2/ complainant CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR 1. Whether the Reporters of local papers ma^T be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to Reporter or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? ^ SUNIL GAUR. I. (ORAL) CrI. M.A. No. 13756/2009 1. Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions. 2. Application is disposed of. CrI. M.C. No. 4056 of2009 Page1 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 CrI. M.C. NO. 4056 of 2009 1. The subject matter of FIR No. 493 of 2005, under Sections 498-A/406/34 of the IPG, registered at Police Station Tllak Nagar, New Delhi, Is a matrimonial dispute, which Is said to have been mutually and amicably resolved between the parties. 2. Notice. Mr. Amit Sharma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, accepts notice on behalf of respondent No.l- State. Mr. N.M. Popll, accepts notice on behalf of respondent No.2 and states that respondent No.2 Is present in the court. She has been duly identified to be the first-informant of the FIR in question, by SI Jassa Singh, Investigating Officer of this case, who Is also present in the Court. 3. The terms of settlement, arrived at between the parties, are reflected In the joint statement made by the petitioner- husband and respondent-wife on 10^^ July, 2006, before the matrimonial court. Certified copy of the aforesaid joint statement is on record and It reflects that this matrimonial dispute stands mutually and amicably settled In full and final for a sum of Rupees five lacs only. Respondent No.2 confirms that she has received the settled amount and divorce by Crl. M.C. No. 4056 of2009 mutual consent has been already obtained and that she has no objection to the quashing of the FIR against the petitioners. 4. In case of "B.S. Joshi v. State of Haryana", AIR 2003 SC 1386, the Apex Court has declared that in matrimonial offences, it becomes the duty of the court to encourage genuine settlements of matrimonial disputes. 5. Since the subject matter of this FIR, which is a matrimonial dispute, stands mutually and amicably settled between the parties, no fruitful purpose would be served in continuance with the proceedings arising out of the FIR in question. 6. Resultantiy, FIR No. 493 of 2005, under Sections 498- A/406/34 of the IPG, registered at Police Station Tilak Nagar, New Delhi, and proceedings emanating there-from stand quashed, qua the petitioners. 7. This petition is accordingly disposed of. February 10, 2010 rs unil Gaur, J. Crl M.C. No.4056 of2009 Page 3