CRL.M.C./4033/2011 of CHINTAN KUMAR @ CHINTU & ORS Vs STATE OF NCT OF DELHI

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI ['2_ ]

+ CRL.M.C. 4033/2011

CHI NT AN KUMAR @ CHINTU & ORS ..... Petitioners Through: Mr.Aiim Mizaj, Adv.

versus

STATE OF NCT OF DELHI ..... Respondent Through: Mr.Sunil Sharma, APP Complainant in person. SI Sunil Kumar, P.S. Uttam Nagar.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.K. SHAll

ORDER Ofo 19.12.2011

1. This is petition for quashing of FIR no.676/2010, u/S 498A/406/34 IPC registered by P.S. Uttam Nagar in respect of which proceedings are pending before the Court of Ms.Shivali Sharma, MM, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi. 498A/406/34 IPC registered by P.S. Uttam Nagar in respect of which proceedings are pending before the Court of Ms.Shivali Sharma, MM, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi.

2. The ground for quashing of the aforesaid FIR is that the petitioner no.l, Chintan Kumar @ Chintu, and the petitioner no.10/Smt. Meenu @ Kamal have settled all their matrimonial disputes before the Mediation Cell as consequence of which, the petitioner no.10 has joined the petitioner no.1 in his matrimonial home. 3. Both the petitioner no.1 and petitioner no.10 have filed separate affidavit, which are placed at page Nos.6 and 8 of the paper book. petitioner no.l, Chintan Kumar @ Chintu, and the petitioner no.10/Smt. Meenu @ Kamal have settled all their matrimonial disputes before the Mediation Cell as consequence of which, the petitioner no.10 has joined the petitioner no.1 in his matrimonial home. 3. Both the petitioner no.1 and petitioner no.10 have filed separate affidavit, which are placed at page Nos.6 and 8 of the paper book.

4. The petitioner no.l and the petitioner no.lO are present in Court. On inquiry, they have stated that they are living together. The complainant/petitioner no.lO has stated since she has joined the petitioner no.l in his matrimonial home, therefore, she has no objection in case the aforesaid FIR against the petitioner nos.l to 9, is quashed. The affidavit of all the petitioners except petitioner no.2, who are present in Court are on record. They have been duly identified by the learned counsel for the petitioners. Court. On inquiry, they have stated that they are living together. The complainant/petitioner no.lO has stated since she has joined the petitioner no.l in his matrimonial home, therefore, she has no objection in case the aforesaid FIR against the petitioner nos.l to 9, is quashed. The affidavit of all the petitioners except petitioner no.2, who are present in Court are on record. They have been duly identified by the learned counsel for the petitioners.

5. So far as the petitioner no.2 is concerned, he is stated to be admitted in Sir Ganga Ram Hospital. Certificate in this regard has been placed on record and an application seeking his personal exemption has also been filed and the same is also allowed. admitted in Sir Ganga Ram Hospital. Certificate in this regard has been placed on record and an application seeking his personal exemption has also been filed and the same is also allowed.

6. The learned APP does not have any objection in quashing of the aforesaid FIR on account of the fact that the petitioner no.l and petitioner no.lO have settled their matrimonial disputes. the aforesaid FIR on account of the fact that the petitioner no.l and petitioner no.lO have settled their matrimonial disputes.

7. Having regard to the fact that the parties have settled their matrimonial disputes and are living together, I feel that no useful purpose would be served by keeping the aforesaid FIR and the consequent proceedings pending before the Trial matrimonial disputes and are living together, I feel that no useful purpose would be served by keeping the aforesaid FIR and the consequent proceedings pending before the Trial

__ __!,

Court. 8. Accordingly, FIR no.676/2010, u/S 498A/406/34 IPC registered by P.S. Uttam Nagar and the consequent proceedings which are pending before the Court of Ms.Shivali Sharma, MM, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi are quashed. 9. Parties to bear their own costs. V.K. SHALl, J

DECEMBER 19, 2011 RN

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEVV DELHI

+ CRL.M.C. 4033/2011

CHINTAN KUMAR @ CHINTU & ORS ..... Petitioners Through Mr.Aiim Mizaj, Adv.

versus

STATE OF NCT OF DELHI

..... Respondent

Through Mr.Sunil Sharma, APP

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.K. SHALl HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.K. SHALl

ORDER 0/o 13.02.2012 Cri.M.A.No.1877/2012(u/S 482 Cr.P.C.)

1. This is an application seeking correction in the order dated 19.12.2011 with regard to the FIR No.676/2010, which was quashed by this Court. 19.12.2011 with regard to the FIR No.676/2010, which was quashed by this Court.

2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners. 3. Issue notice. 3. Issue notice.

4. Mr. Sharma, learned APP accf:';Jts notice on behalf of the State. 5. The learned APP does not have any objection. 5. The learned APP does not have any objection.

6. In view of the statement made before this Court, it seems that on account of inadvertent mistake, the FIR number has been on account of inadvertent mistake, the FIR number has been

written as FIR No.676/2010 in place of FIR No.676/2007.

7. Accordingly, in order dated 19.12.2011, FIR number shall be read as FIR no.676/2007. read as FIR no.676/2007.

8. The application is disposed of and the correction stands

incorporated.

V.K. SHALl, J

FEBRUARY 13,2012 RN

f>..C..