Ravinder Singh Sandhu & ANR v. State Of National Capital Territory Of Delhi & ANR

$~3 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + RAVINDER SINGH SANDHU & ANR ..... Petitioner Represented by:

Mr. Ajay Malhotra, Adv.

versus STATE OF NATIONAL CAPITAL TERRITORY OF DELHI & ANR ..... Respondent Represented by:

Mr. Ashok Kumar Garg, APP with SI Ved Parkash PS CWC N.Pura.

Mr. Vinod Kumar, Mr. Arun Baali, Advs. for R-2.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA

O R D E R

% 23.09.2016 By the present petition the petitioners seek quashing of FIR No. 65/2010 under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC registered at PS CAW Cell Dwarka, Delhi on the complaint of Respondent No.2 on the ground that the parties have settled the matter.

Learned APP for the State on instructions from Investigating Officer submits that in the above-noted FIR the two petitioners are the only accused and respondent No.2 the only complainant/victim.

Respondent No. 2 is present in Court and is identified by the learned counsel and the Investigating Officer. She states that she has settled the matter with the petitioners before the Delhi High Court Mediation and Conciliation Centre as per the settlement dated 19th March, 2015 copy whereof is enclosed at pages 42 to 53 of the paper book. She states that the statement for first motion for divorce by mutual consent has already been recorded between the petitioner No.1 and respondent No.2 and she would cooperate further so that the parties are granted divorce by mutual consent. She further states that she would abide by the terms of settlement arrived at between the parties as noted vide agreement dated 19th March, 2015 and in terms thereof she does not wish to pursue the abovementioned FIR and the proceedings pursuant thereto.

The petitioners who are present in Court and are identified by their counsel affirm the statement of respondent No.2 and state that they will abide by the terms of settlement arrived at before the Delhi High Court Mediation & Conciliation Centre vide agreement dated 19th March, 2015. Petitioner No.1 further states that he would also cooperate in seeking divorce by mutual consent between the parties. In view of the fact that the parties have amicably resolved their differences of their own free will, volition and without any coercion and no useful purpose will be served in continuance of the proceedings, rather the same would create further acrimony between them, it would be in the interest of justice to quash the abovementioned FIR and the proceedings pursuant thereto. There is no legal impediment in quashing the FIR in question.

Consequently, FIR No. 65/2010 under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC registered at PS CAW Cell Dwarka, Delhi and proceedings pursuant thereto are hereby quashed.

Parties have signed this order sheet in acknowledgment of their statements made before this Court.

The petition is disposed of. Order dasti.

MUKTA GUPTA, J.

SEPTEMBER 23, 2016 'ga'