$~ 21
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CRL.M.C.No.3444/2011
% Judgment delivered on:17th October, 2011
N. K. TOMAR & ORS. ..... Petitioners
Through : Mr. J. K. Bhola, Adv.
versus
STATE & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through : Ms.Rajdipa Behura, APP
for State/R-1.
Mr. Saleem Hasan, Adv for R-2.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT
1. Whether the Reporters of local papers
may be allowed to see the judgment? NO
2. To be referred to Reporter or not? NO
3. Whether the judgment should be reported NO
in the Digest?
SURESH KAIT, J. (Oral)
1. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that vide FIR No.444/2007 dated 27.10.2007 case under Section 308/323/336/506/34 Indian Penal Code, 1860 read with Section 27 Arms Act has been registered against the Crl.M.C.No.3444/2011 Page 1 of 6 petitioners on the complaint of respondent No.2 at police station Vasant Vihar, New Delhi.
2. Further submits that respondent No.2 has amicably settled the all the issues qua the aforesaid FIR with the petitioners, therefore, he does not wish to pursue present case any further.
3. Respondent No.2 present in person with his learned counsel Mr.Saleem Hasan, Advocate, who has duly identified him as respondent No.2.
4. On instructions, learned counsel for respondent No.2 submits that respondent No.2 has settled all the issues qua aforesaid FIR and he does not wish to pursue present case against the petitioners.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that another FIR No.498/2007 has already been compounded by the petitioners against the respondent No.2.
6. Further respondent No.2 submits that he has no objection, if the present FIR is quashed.
7. Ms.Rajdipa Behura, learned APP for State strongly Crl.M.C.No.3444/2011 Page 2 of 6 opposed the petition and submits that in light of decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab & Anr. in SLP (Crl.) No.8989/2010 wherein the Division Bench of the Supreme Court has referred three earlier decisions viz, B.S. Joshi V. State of Haryana (2003) 4 SCC 675, Nikhil Merchant v. Central Bureau of Investigation & Anr. (2008) 9 SCC 677 & Manoj Sharma Vs. State & Ors. (2008) 16 SCC 1 to the larger Bench for re-consideration whether the abovesaid three decisions were decided correctly or not. Therefore, she has prayed that till the outcome of the larger Bench of the Apex Court, present petition may be adjourned sine-die. Alternatively, she prayed that in the event, the FIR is quashed, heavy costs should be imposed upon the petitioners as the State machinery has been used.
8. I find force in the submission of learned APP, however, keeping in view the decision of Division Bench of Bombay High Court, in Nari Motiram Hira Vs. Avinash Balkrishnan & Anr. in Crl.W.P.No.995/2010 decided on 03.02.2011 has permitted for compounding of the offences of 'non-compoundable' category as per Section 320 Cr. P.C. Crl.M.C.No.3444/2011 Page 3 of 6 even after discussing Gian Singh (supra).
9. I have also taken similar view in a number of cases as the view already taken by the Division Bench of Bombay High Court that till above referred three decisions, are set aside or altered, by the larger Bench of the Supreme Court, all the above three decision hold the field and are the binding precedents.
10. In the present case, cross cases were registered between the parties. The FIR No.498/2007 has already been compounded. If the present FIR is not compounded, it will be a great injustice for the petitioners.
11. In the circumstances, in view of above, FIR No.444/2007 under Section 308/323/336/506/34 Indian Penal Code, 1860 read with Section 27 Arms Act registered against the petitioners at police station Vasant Vihar, New Delhi & proceedings arising therefrom are hereby quashed.
12. Further, I find force in the submission of learned APP for State. Since the government machinery has been used and precious time of the court has been consumed. For Crl.M.C.No.3444/2011 Page 4 of 6 substantial justice, costs should be imposed upon the petitioners.
13. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioners, on instructions from the petitioners submits that petitioner Nos.1 & 2 are intending to donate some amount for the welfare purposes.
14. This Court place on record the appreciation on this gesture advanced by petitioner Nos.1 & 2, therefore, I direct the petitioner Nos.1 & 2 shall pay a sum of `1.00 lac each.
15. Further direct that total sum of `2.00 lacs shall be deposited in favour of Principal, Senior Secondary School for Blind Boys, Sewa Kutir, BBM Depot Road, Kingsway Camp, Delhi within two weeks from today and proof thereof shall be placed on the record by petitioners.
16. Keeping the financial position of petitioner Nos.3 to 5, into view, I refrain in imposing any costs upon them.
17. The amount as donated by the petitioner shall be kept in FDR. The interest accrued thereon shall be utilised for the well being of needy children of the school. Crl.M.C.No.3444/2011 Page 5 of 6
18. Accordingly, Criminal M.C.No.3444/2011 is allowed and disposed of in above terms.
19. Dasti.
SURESH KAIT, J October 17th 2011/Mk Crl.M.C.No.3444/2011 Page 6 of 6