Full Text
Date of hearing and Order: February 05, 2010 Crl. M.C. No. 4060 of 2009
Arun and others The State Petitioners
Through: Counsel for the petitoner
Through; Mr. R.N. Vats, Additional Public Prosecutor for State with ASI
Subh Ram.
JUDGMENT
1. Whether the Reporters of local papers may 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)
1. This is a joint petition for quashing of FIR No. 25 of 2009, under Sections 498-A/406/34 of the IPG, registered at Police Station Khayala, Delhi, on the basis of settlement arrived at between the parties, and both the petitioners- husband and wife, are present in the Court. Crl M.C. No. 4060 of2009 Page 1 2010:DHC:8670
2. Notice, jvir. R.N. Vats, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, accepts notice on behalf of respondent/ State and submits that ASI Subh Ram is present in the Court and he identifies petitioner No.-2, as the first-informant ofthe FIR in question.
3. Petitioner No.2- wife, affirms her affidavit filed in this petition and states that she is happily living with her petitioner No.l- husband since 13^'' September, 2009, and now she has no grievance and does not want to pursue the FIR in question and joins the petitioner-husband in making the prayer for quashing of the FIR in question.
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. Considering the fact that 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 continuing with the proceedings arising out of the FIR in question. Consequently, FIR No. 25 of 2009, under Sections 498-A/406/34 of the IPC, registered at Police Station Khayala, Delhi, and proceedings emanating therefrom, stand quashed CrlM-QNo. 4060 of2009 Page 2 Ik L, V qua petitioner No.l. It is made clear that this order will not stand in the way of petitioner No.2- wife, in case she has any matrimonial grievance in future.
6. This petition stand accordingly disposed of. February 05, 2010 rs Sufiil Gaur, J. Crl M.C. No. 4060 of2009 Page 3