23 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. 3031/2010 VISHAL GOEL & ORS Petitioners Tlirougli : Mr. Gagan Gupta, Adv. with petitioner No.l in person. versus STATE Respondent Through : l^lr. Navin Sharma, APP for State with Investigating Officer. Respondent No.2/complainant in person. CORAIVI: HON'BLE |V1S. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI ORDER % 21.12.2010 CrI.M.A No.18814/2010 fexemptionl Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. CrI.M.A. No.18813/2010 (for earlv hearing^ This application is filed by the petitioners praying inter alia for advancing the date of hearing fixed in the matter, i.e., on 10.3.2011. For the reasons stated in the application, particularly, in paras 3 to 5 thereof, the same is allowed and the date of hearing fixed in the ^ presentpetitionis advancedfor today. The application is disposed of. CRL.M.C. 3031/2010 Page 1 of 5 V Signing Date:05.08.2024 16:58:50 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 w ) . \ CRL.M.C. 3031/2010 1. The present petition is filed by the petitioners under Section 482 Cr.P.C. praying inter alia for quashing of FIR No.329/2002 lodged by respondent No.2/complainant against her husband, petitioner No.l, and his family members, petitioners No.2 to 6, under Sections 498A/406/34 IPG, registered with PS Shalimar Bagh, Delhi and all proceedings arising therefrom. 2. Counsel for the petitioners states that the marriage of petitioner No.l and respondent No.2/complainant was solemnized on 11.2.1998. From out of the wedlock, a baby girl was born on 23.12.1998. Thereafter, due to certain disputes and differences which arose between petitioner No.l and respondent No.2/complainant, the latter left the matrimonial home on 3.12.2000 and started living separately. Subsequently, respondent No.2/complainant lodged the aforesaid FIR against the petitioners on 29.5.2002. 3. Counsel for the petitioners states that during the pendency of the aforesaid proceedings, with the intervention of family friends, counsels and well wishers, the parties decided to end their inter se disputes and executed a Compromise Deed dated 16.6.2010 (Annexure-D). In the aforesaid Compromise Deed, it was agreed by both the parties that they will make an endeavour to stay together and CRL.M.C. 3031/2010 Page 2 of 5 •x; \J bring up tlieir minor cliild in a better and healthy environment. It was further agreed that petitioner No.l would take a separate rented accommodation, where he would reside with respondent No.2/complainant and their minor daughter. Both the parties agreed that in view of the settlement arrived at between them, they would withdraw all the pending litigations filed against each other. 4. Counsel for the petitioners states that after execution of the aforesaid Compromise Deed, respondent No.2/complainant joined the matrimonial home, which has been taken on rent by petitioner No.l to reside separately from his family members. It is further stated that while petitioner No.l withdrew the petition filed by him for divorce, respondent No.2/complainant also withdrew the petition filed by her under Section 125 Cr.P.C. for grant of maintenance. Now, it is stated that as both the parties are jointly residing in the matrimonial home and there is no further dispute between them, the present petition may be allowed. 5. Respondent No.2/complainant, who is present in the Court and is identified by the counsel for the petitioners, confirms the aforesaid position and states that she has arrived at the aforesaid settlement with petitioner No.l of her own free will and volition and without any undue influence or coercion from any quarter. She further states that CRLIVI.C. 3031/2010 Page 3 of 5 in view of the amicable settlement arrived at between the parties, she does not wish to proceed further with the aforesaid FIR and has no objection to the same being quashed. 6. Learned APP for the State states, on instruction from the Investigating Officer, that after the investigation was completed in the aforesaid FIR, a charge sheet has been filed and the evidence of the prosecution witnesses is being recorded. He confirms the fact that the parties have arrived at a settlement and now they are living together. He, therefore, does not oppose the prayer made in the present petition. 7. Having regard to the aforesaid submission made by the counsel for the petitioners and taking into consideration the fact that petitioner No.l and respondent No.2/complainant are now cohabiting at their matrimonial home, no useful purpose will be served by proceeding further with the aforesaid FIR and the proceedings arising therefrom. 8. Accordingly, the prayer made in the petition is allowed and FIR No.329/2002 lodged by respondent No.2/complainant with PS Shalimar Bagh, Delhi, and all proceedings arising therefrom are quashed. CRL.M.C. 3031/2010 Page 4 of 5 > \ •; 9. The petition is disposed of. File be consigned to the record room. The date fixed in the matter, i.e., 10.3.2010 stands cancelled. DECEMBER 21, 2010 sk HIMA KOHLI,J CRL.M.C. 3031/2010 Page 5 of 5 V