Vijender Mohan Pathak and Others vs State and Others

Gita Mittal, J.—Notice.

Mr. R.N. Vats accept notice for the State.

This petition has been jointly filed by Shri Vijendra Mohan Pathak, petitioner No. 1, his brothers Shri Satendra Mohan Pathak and Shri. Yogendra Mohan Pathak as petitioner Nos. 2 and 3; his mother Smt. Savitri Pathak as petitioner No. 4, Smt. Prabha Bhushan and Smt. Vidhutma Jha as petitioner Nos. 5 & 6 as well as his father Shri Jagdish Prasad Pathak, petitioner No. 7 u/s 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code praying for quashing of the FIR No. 24/1999 under Sections 498A/34 of the Indian Penal Code registered by police station, Rohini. The contention of the petitioners is that the petitioner No. 1 was married in accordance with Hindu Rites and Ceremonies with the respondent No. 2 on the 8th May, 1979. From the wedlock, they were blessed with two sons, firstly Vikas Pathak who was born on 9th February, 1980 and then a second son Gaurav Pathak who was born on 24th July, 1981. Both the sons are now majors and are stated to be residing with the respondent No. 2. On account of certain irreconcilable disputes between the petitioner No. 1 and the respondent No. 2, the parties separated. The respondent No. 2 stated to have lodged a criminal complaint on 24th August, 1998 against all the petitioners at the Crime Against Women Cell at Ashok Vihar, Delhi. This complaint was registered by the police as FIR No. 24/1999 under Sections 498A read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code on 9th January, 1999. Upon completion of investigation, the police stated to have filed a challan with criminal proceedings which are stated to be now pending in the court of Ms. Rekha, Metropolitan Magistrate, Rohini, Delhi.

The respondent No. 2 had also filed a petition seeking dissolution of the marriage of the parties by a decree of divorce on grounds of cruelty and dissertion u/s 13(1)(i-a) & (i-b) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 in the court of Shri T.S. Kashyap, A.D.J., Delhi.

The petitioners as well as respondent No. 2 are present in person. It has been submitted that during the pendency of this litigation with the intervention and assistance of well wishers, the parties arrived at a settlement on terms and conditions which are detailed in para 9 of the present petition. As a consequence, the petitioner No. 1 and respondent No. 2 sought dissolution of their marriage by decree of divorce by mutual consent and filed appropriate applications in the pending proceedings. The marriage between the petitioner No. 1 and respondent No. 2 stands dissolved by a decree of divorce dated 14th March, 2008 by mutual consent.

By way of the present petition, a prayer is made that having regard to the nature of complaint lodged by the respondent No. 2 which arose out of marital discord between the petitioner No. 1 and respondent No. 2 on account of the subsequent settlement between the parties, no fruitful purpose would be served in case the criminal proceedings remain pending and the same may be quashed. I have heard learned Counsel for the parties as well as the parties who are present in person. The respondent No. 2 has not disputed the settlement which was arrived at resulting in the conversion of the pending petition for divorce into a petition seeking dissolution of their marriage by a decree of divorce by mutual consent. The marriage between the petitioner No. 1 and the respondent No. 2 stands dissolved by virtue of this decree dated 14th March, 2008. As a result of relation and ties between the petitioners on the one hand and the respondent No. 2 have also snapped. The respondent No. 2 has also submitted in court that on account of the long pendency of the disputes and the litigation since 1999, she does not have the means and resources and has no desire to prosecute the litigation any further or the criminal complaint which was lodged by her. She has further made a prayer to this Court that the proceedings be closed and she may be permitted to get on with her life without having to maintain any contact with or intervention of the petitioners.

On a consideration of the matter, it would appear that in the aforenoticed facts and circumstances, that interests of justice merit that the criminal proceedings be brought to a close. Having regard to the nature of grievances which had been expressed by the respondent No. 2, it would be in the interest of social harmony as well as interest of justice that the parties are permitted to get on with their respective lives without any opportunity to interact especially in the pending criminal proceedings.

Sh. Satender Mohan Pathak, petitioner No. 2 and Sh. Yogendra Mohan Pathak, petitioner No. 3 who are present in court have submitted that they would compensate the respondent No. 2 for the costs of the present litigation and would pay an amount of Rs. 25000/- towards this end. In my view, such an offer would reflect the bonafide intention of these petitioners and is certainly fair in the facts and circumstances of the present case.

Accordingly, this petition is allowed.

It is directed that the FIR No. 24/1999 registered by the police station Rohini and the pending proceedings arising therefrom in the court of Ms. Rekha, Metropolitan Magistrate, Rohini Delhi would stand quashed.

The petitioner Nos. 2 and 3 have handed over an amount of Rs. 25,000/- to the respondent No. 2 in court in terms of their statement.

Nothing further remains for adjudication in the present matter.

This petition is disposed of accordingly.

Dasti to the parties.