Mohd Asim & Ors v. State

ORDER %

09.11.2011 In view of the order passed in Criminal M.C. 3672/2011 today, this Revision petition has become infructuous. The petition is accordingly dismissed as infructuous. NOVEMBER 09, 2011 j SURESH KAITJ Certify that the digital file and physical file have been compared and the digital data is as per the physical file and no page is missing. ' ** ! • '• i". • ! ' .1 $-28 *1N THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT MEW DELHI -I-CRL.M.C. 3672/2011 0^ ludamentdeliveredon: 9^^ NovBUiber,2011 MOHD ASIM &ORS Petitioner Through : Mr. M.L Yadav, Adv. versus STATE ANR Respondent Through: ivis. Rajdipa Behura,APP. Mr. Shoaib Shal<eel, Adv. -for 'R2/complainant. CORAMs HOIM'BLE MR. JUSTICE"SURESHKAIT

¶1Whether the Reporters of local papers may be allowedto see the judgment?

¶2To be referred to Reporter or not?

¶3Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? SURESH iCAlT, I- (OraB) CRL. M.A. 17530/2011 CExemptEosi) Allowed subject to all just exceptions. CRL.. MX, 3672/2011 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that FIR No. Crl. M.C.3672/2011 Page 1 of4 ' • • • i /•h: •• • • ' •* v-'r Vr'." • rf'' [. • i- :, EV- ". r ' ' i' • I ; 1: . . ' - •[, • r/;- " ^ P'-.V - , . ir . • fi'fv —r U y 424/2006 was registered against tine petitioners on the complaint of respondent No. 2/Ms. Talat Feroz, P.S. Lahorl Gate, under Sections 498/406/34 Indian Penal Code, 1860. It is submitted that the all the disputes -among the parties have been settled.qua settlementdated 12.10.2011, arrived at between them at Delhi High Court Mediation and Conciliation Centre. The relevant portion of the settlement is produced herein above. "6 The following settlement has been arrived at between he parties hereto : a) That the first party i.e. Mohd. Asinn has agreed to divorce the second party i.e. Ms. Talat Firoz and both the parties shall liTe the joint' application before the Hon'ble Court for quashing of FIR bearing No. 424/2006, P.S. Lahorl Gate and the first party i.e. Mohd. Asinn shall produce the Talaknama signed by Mohd. Asim as well as the two witnesses and both the parties shall remain present on the date of the hearing for recording, their respective statements. b) That the first party i.e:. Mohd. Azim has also agreed not to claim the child custody of the daughter Crl.M.C. 3672/2011 Page 2 of4 l::: •••I-/ •; - : ; ••'.cr cftj. 'V; ^1' •; ' , ' .1 ,• - • ' • ? • . r -L .k. CrI. M.C.3672/2011 Page 3 of4 /,e. Baby Fatima in future. c) That the second party has agreed not to initiate any proceedingsqua the maintenanceof the second party againstthe firstparty in anymanner whatsoever. d) That both the parties have agreed to withdrawall the proceedings,if any, pending before any court of law against each other. •3 Consequent,to the said settlement, the petitioner No. 1 has pronounced"Talal<"to respondentNo. 2 today. Aletter , to this effect, which is witnessed by two witnesses is taken on record. Respondent No.2/Ms. Talat Feroz is personally present in the court today. Sh7 has been duly identified by her counsel, Mr. Shoaib Shakeel, Advocate. Mr. Shoaib Shakeel, Advocate upon instructions of i-espondent No. 2 submits that respondent No. 2 has settled all the disputes qua the above mentioned FIR with the petitioners and she does not want to pursue the case further. She has no objection if the present FIR is quashed. Learned APP for State submits that the matter is listed for recording Prosecution Evidence at the trial court. 3^' m ' "I '-m •§ i •'-v She further submits that since the Government Machinery has been misused and the precioustime of the courthas been wasted,the petitionersshaii be imposedwith heavy costs beforequashingthe FIR. 1find force in the submissionsmade by learnedAPP for State. Accordingly,the petitionerNo, 1shall depositacostsof Rs.25,000/-to be paid in the Welfare Fund of Deihi Police withinaweekfrom today. Proofofthe paymentof costsshall be placed on record. In the above circumstances and in the Interest of justice, I quash FIR No. 424/2006,-P.S. Lahori Gate under Sections498 A/406/34 Indian Penal Code, 1860 and all the proceedingsemanatingtherefrom. CriminalM.C. 3672/2011is disposedof. Dasti to both the parties. SURESH KAIT, JUDGE NOVEMBER 09, 2011/. Crl. M.C. 3672/2011 Rage 4 of4

% $-15 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.REV.P. 783/2010 MOHD ASIM & ORS Petitioner Througii : Mr. [\/i.L. Yadav, Adv. versus STATE Respondent Through : |V|s. Ritu Gauba, APR. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT