Virender Gulati & Ors. v. State & Anr.

1. This is a petition for quashing of FIR No. 113/2010 u/s 498A/406/34 IPC registered with P.S. Nanakpura. There are six petitioners, out of which petitioner No.1, Virender Gulati, petitioner No.2, Naresh Gulati and petitioner No.4, Yogesh Gulati are present and are duly identified by their counsel.

2. So far as petitioner Nos. 3, 5 and 6 are concerned, they are not present, being ladies. Their affidavits are stated to be on record. The learned counsel for the petitioners has stated that he has identified the affidavits of three ladies which are on record. On oral request of the learned counsel for the petitioners, petitioner Nos. 3,[5] and 6.[1] being ladies are exempted from personal appearance. 2011:DHC:10276

3. The ground for quashing of FIR is that the petitioner No.1 and the respondent No.2/complainant Smt.Reena @ Sheetal have settled all their matrimonial disputes and as a consequence of which a decree of divorce was passed by the competent Court on 25.08.2011. Copy of the decree of divorce has been placed on record at page No.51. It has also been stated that in terms of the settlement having been arrived at between the parties a total sum of ~ 2 lacs is to be paid to the respondent No.2/complainant towards full and final settlement of her entire claim, out of which ~ 1 lac has already been paid to her by way of two installments and balance amount of ~ 1 lac is paid to her today in the Court by way of drafts bearing Nos. 639224 and 767348 dated 17.09.2011 for ~50,000/- each drawn on Kotak Mahindra Bank and Royal Bank of Scotland respectively.

3. The respondent No.2/complainant is present in Court. She has been duly identified by ASI Sumedha. She has accepted the drafts of ~ 1 lac. She has further supported the averments made in the petition and stated that she has no objection in case FIR and the consequent proceedings which are pending at the investigation stage are quashed.

4. Learned APP does not have any objection if the FIR and the consequent proceedings are quashed.

5. For the aforementioned reasons, I feel as the parties have been divorced, no useful purpose would be served by keeping the FIR and the · consequent proceedings pending. Accordingly, FIR No. 113/2010 u/s 498A/406/34 IPC and the consequent investigation being carried out by the local police are quashed.

6. Parties to bear their own cost. V.K. SHALl, J SEPTEMBER 28, 2011 mr ~