Gaurav Bhatia & Ors v. State & Anr

ORDER

23.Ll.2011 This is a petition filed by the petitioners who are 5 in number for quashing of FIR no.5I/2007, u/S 49BA/406/34 IPC registered by P.S. Amar Colony, Lajpat Nagar-IV, New Delhi in respect of which trial is pending before the competent Court of Ms.Pooja Talwar, learned MM, Saket Courts, New Delhi. The ground for quashing of the aforesaid FIR is that the petitioner no.1 has settled his matrimonial disputes with the respondent no.2, as a consequence of which, a decree of divorce on the basis of mutual consent was passed by the competent Court on 30.7.20LI. It is further stated that the petitioner no.1 has also paid a sum of tB lacs to the complainant towards the full and final settlement of her entire claim of permanent alimony, maintenance, dowry articles, etc. It is further stated that as the matrimonial dispute has been settled,

¶2a Y 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. I

¶3no useful purpose would be served by keeping the aforesaid FIR and the consequent proceedings pending. All the 5 petitioners except petitioner no.4 are stated to be present. They have been duly identified by their counsel. Respondent no.2 is also present and duly identified by the learned APP as well as IO. The respondent no.2 has also filed her affidavit. She has stated that she has received the entire amount of TB lacs and all the obligations have been carried out by the respective sides in terms of the said settlement. She states that she has no objection in case the aforesaid FIR is quashed. In view of the aforesaid facts, I feel that no useful purpose would be served by keeping the aforesaid FIR and the consequent proceedings pending before the Court. Accordingly, FIR no.5L/2007, u/S 49BA/406/34IPC registered by P.S. Amar Colony, Lajpat Nagar-IV, New Delhi and the consequent proceedings, which are pending before the Court of Ms.Pooja Talwar, learned MM, Saket Courts, New Delhi are L

4.

¶5a {, quashed.

¶6Parties to bear their own costs. NOVEMBER 23,zOtL RNv AAnA' / v.K. SHALI,J

$-23 X IN THE HIGH COURT + CRL.M.C.2707/20II GAURAV BHATIA & ORS Through VCTSUS OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI o/o 1. Mr.suman t<upoor' Pqtitioners STATE & ANR ..... Respondents Through Dr.Deepa, Adv. for the complainant. Mr.Sunil Sharma, APP ASI Ompal Singh CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.K. SHALI