Full Text
Translation output
,,- #43.
% 19.09.2011 I. d' tt Ad t
Present: Petitioners in person with Mr. Pank~J Men 1ra · a, voca.teh. ASI
Ms. Fizani Husain, APP for the resp~Dndent No. 1/State WI
Naresh Kumar, Secur\ty (lnvestiga~ing Officer).
Respondent No. 2 in person. •
+Cri.M.A.No. 11108/2011(Exemption} .
I
Exemption allowed, subject to all just e~ceptions.
I
Application stands disposed of.
Cri.M.C. 3130/2011
Petitioners as well as the responden~ No. 2 are identified by their counsel and the Investigating Officer ASI Narrsh Kumar, Security.
This is a petition under Section 482 C~.P.C. seeking quashing of FIR NO. 689/2005 under Sections 406/498A/34 IPC r~gistered at P.S. Uttam Nagar on
I the complaint of the respondent No.2.
I
Ground for seeking quashing is that the parties have amicably settled
I
I the dispute and now there is no dispute left/between them.
It is submitted on behalf of the peti~ioners that the FIR in question is the result of matrimonial·discord, which h/as b·een amicably settled and the
I parties are residing together since April~ 2010. Learned counsel for the
I petitioners submits that a statement i~ this regard was made by the complainant Pooja Sharma in the court pf Principa•l judge, Family Court 0n
I
17.05.2010. Copy of the said statemen~ is placed on record. It is further
I
! submitted that since the parties have r~solved their dispute and they are happily living together, no fruitful purpos, shall be served by prosecuting the petitioners on the basis of the instant FlR. Thus, learned counsel urges ·for
I quashing the FIR.
\
2011:DHC:13045
Respondent No. 2 confirms that she ha~ amicably settled the matter with the petitioners of her own accord withoutr any inducement or threat and that she is happily living together with the peti~ioner No. 1 in her matrimonial home for the last one and a half year. Respondent No. 2 states that she
I
I made a similar statement in the Family Court! Copy of the said statement is
' on record and respondent No. 2 has append~d her signatures today on the aforesaid copy of the statement to verify its genuineness. Respondent No. 2
! submits that now, there is no dispute left betyveen her and the petitioners, as such, in order to preserve harmony in her m~trimonial Hfe, she does wish the petitioners to be prosecuted on the basis of her complaint and she has no objection if the FIR and the consequent proc~edings are quashed.
I
Learned Ms. Fizani Husain, APP ap~earing on behalf of the State
I submits that in view of the compromise arriyed at between the parties, State has no objection if the FIR and the proce~dings emanating therefrom are quashed.
"- I
Since the parties have amicably resolyed the dispute and now, they are
I living happily together, in the interest of !harmonious matrimonial relation between the parties, I feel that no useful pjurpose shall be served in keeping the FIR and the proceedings arising out of the same alive. Accordingly, FIR
No. 689/2005 under Sections 406/498A/34/IPC registered at P.S. Uttam Nagar and the proceedings arising out of the sam~ are quashed.
Petition stands disposed of.
SEPTEMBER 19, 2011
I
(AJI~IHOK£)
JUDGE
2011:DHC:13045
% 19.09.2011 I. d' tt Ad t
Present: Petitioners in person with Mr. Pank~J Men 1ra · a, voca.teh. ASI
Ms. Fizani Husain, APP for the resp~Dndent No. 1/State WI
Naresh Kumar, Secur\ty (lnvestiga~ing Officer).
Respondent No. 2 in person. •
+Cri.M.A.No. 11108/2011(Exemption} .
I
Exemption allowed, subject to all just e~ceptions.
I
Application stands disposed of.
Cri.M.C. 3130/2011
Petitioners as well as the responden~ No. 2 are identified by their counsel and the Investigating Officer ASI Narrsh Kumar, Security.
This is a petition under Section 482 C~.P.C. seeking quashing of FIR NO. 689/2005 under Sections 406/498A/34 IPC r~gistered at P.S. Uttam Nagar on
I the complaint of the respondent No.2.
I
Ground for seeking quashing is that the parties have amicably settled
I
I the dispute and now there is no dispute left/between them.
It is submitted on behalf of the peti~ioners that the FIR in question is the result of matrimonial·discord, which h/as b·een amicably settled and the
I parties are residing together since April~ 2010. Learned counsel for the
I petitioners submits that a statement i~ this regard was made by the complainant Pooja Sharma in the court pf Principa•l judge, Family Court 0n
I
17.05.2010. Copy of the said statemen~ is placed on record. It is further
I
! submitted that since the parties have r~solved their dispute and they are happily living together, no fruitful purpos, shall be served by prosecuting the petitioners on the basis of the instant FlR. Thus, learned counsel urges ·for
I quashing the FIR.
\
2011:DHC:13045
Respondent No. 2 confirms that she ha~ amicably settled the matter with the petitioners of her own accord withoutr any inducement or threat and that she is happily living together with the peti~ioner No. 1 in her matrimonial home for the last one and a half year. Respondent No. 2 states that she
I
I made a similar statement in the Family Court! Copy of the said statement is
' on record and respondent No. 2 has append~d her signatures today on the aforesaid copy of the statement to verify its genuineness. Respondent No. 2
! submits that now, there is no dispute left betyveen her and the petitioners, as such, in order to preserve harmony in her m~trimonial Hfe, she does wish the petitioners to be prosecuted on the basis of her complaint and she has no objection if the FIR and the consequent proc~edings are quashed.
I
Learned Ms. Fizani Husain, APP ap~earing on behalf of the State
I submits that in view of the compromise arriyed at between the parties, State has no objection if the FIR and the proce~dings emanating therefrom are quashed.
"- I
Since the parties have amicably resolyed the dispute and now, they are
I living happily together, in the interest of !harmonious matrimonial relation between the parties, I feel that no useful pjurpose shall be served in keeping the FIR and the proceedings arising out of the same alive. Accordingly, FIR
No. 689/2005 under Sections 406/498A/34/IPC registered at P.S. Uttam Nagar and the proceedings arising out of the sam~ are quashed.
Petition stands disposed of.
SEPTEMBER 19, 2011
I
(AJI~IHOK£)
JUDGE
2011:DHC:13045
JUDGMENT