DINESH MAHAJAN AND ORS. Vs. STATE AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of the present petition filed under Sec. 482 Cr.P.C., petitioners seek directions thereby quashing of FIR No. 277/2012 registered at PS -Moti Nagar for the offence punishable under Ss. 498A/406/34 IPC against them.

(2.) Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submits that the aforesaid case was registered on the complaint of respondent No. 2, namely Ms. Shweta Mahajan due to some matrimonial dispute who thereafter settled the matter with the petitioners vide settlement dated 21st July, 2015 before the learned Principal Judge, Family Court (West District), Delhi. Consequent thereto, marriage between petitioner No. 1 and respondent No. 2 has been dissolved vide decree of mutual divorce dated 21st July, 2015 under Sec. 13B(2) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. As per the settlement, the petitioners agreed to pay a sum of Rs. 4,30,000/ - as full and final settlement. Out of the settlement amount, an amount of Rs. 2,15,000/ - was paid at the time of granting bail and an amount of Rs. 1,15,000/ - was paid at the time of first motion and the remaining amount of Rs. 90,000/ - has been paid today in the Court by way of demand draft bearing No. 202846 dated 18.08.2015 (revalidated on 18.11.2015) drawn on ICICI Bank and an amount of Rs. 10,000/ - paid in cash to the respondent No. 2. Thus, respondent No. 2 does not wish to pursue her case further against the petitioners.

(3.) Respondent No. 2 is personally present in the Court alongwith her counsel named above and she has been duly identified by the Investigating Officer of the case. The learned counsel under instructions does not dispute the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner and submits that the present matter has been amicably settled, marriage between the respondent No. 2 and the petitioner No. 1 has been dissolved vide decree of divorce dated 21st July, 2015, she has received the total amount of Rs. 4,30,000/ - and has no complaint whatsoever against the petitioner No. 1 and his family members. Respondent No. 2 states that now no dispute with petitioners survives and so, the proceedings arising out of the FIR in question may be brought to an end.