Delhi High Court
Semi & Others vs The State (Nct Of Delhi) on 6 August, 2008
Author: Anil Kumar
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CRL.M.C.No.2033/2008
% Date of decision : 06.08.2008
Semi & Others ....... Petitioners
Through: Mr.B.S.Rana, Advocate for the
petitioner Nos.1 to 6.
Mr.Ajay Jasra, Advocate for the
petitioner Nos.7,9 to 13.
Mr.Raj Singh, Advocate for the
petitioner Nos.8 & 14.
Versus
The State (NCT Of Delhi) ......... Respondent
Through : Mr. R.N. Vats, APP for State.
CORAM :-
* HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR
1. Whether reporters of Local papers may YES
be allowed to see the judgment?
2. To be referred to the reporter or not? NO
3. Whether the judgment should be reported NO
in the Digest?
ANIL KUMAR, J.
*
Petitioners are present with their counsel. The petitioners contend
that the matter pertaining to FIR No.726/2005 under Sections
308/323/379/147/148/149/34 of Indian Penal Code registered at
Police Station Shalimar Bagh, New Delhi against petitioner Nos.1 to 6
and FIR No.219/2006 under Sections 307/308/394/
147/148/149/427/34 of Indian Penal Code registered at Police Station
Shalimar Bagh, New Delhi against petitioner Nos.7 to 14 have been
resolved amicably. The attorney of Sh.Rishi Nanda, his brother
Sh.Tushar Nanda is present. The duly stamped General Power of
Attorney of Sh.Rishi Nanda in favour of Sh.Tushar Nanda is filed.
Mr.Mukhtar Hussain, complainant of FIR No.219/2006 under Sections
307/308/394/147/148/149/427/34 of Indian Penal Code registered at
Police Station Shalimar Bagh, New Delhi and Mr.Tushar Nanda,
attorney of Sh.Rishi Nanda, petitioner No.7 and complainant in FIR
No.726/2005 under Sections 308/323/379/147/148/149/34 of Indian
Penal Code registered at Police Station Shalimar Bagh, New Delhi have
represented that the matters have been resolved between the parties.
The learned counsel for the parties contend that the disputes arose in a
function in a hotel and since the disputes have been resolved and
settled, no useful purpose shall be served in continuing with the
proceedings pursuant to the said FIRs. It is also contended that it shall
be in the interest of justice and in order to have future peace that the
said FIRs be quashed.
Let the statement of attorney of Sh.Rishi Nanda, petitioner No.7
and petitioner No.6 be recorded.
The statements of Sh.Tushar Nanda, attorney of petitioner No.7
and petitioner No.6, Sh.Mukhtar Hussain who are the complainants in
the FIRs have been recorded. The petitioners and their counsel have
contended that the disputes have been resolved amicably and no useful
purpose shall be served in continuing the proceedings pursuant to FIR
No.726/2005 under Sections 308/323/379/147/148/149/34 of Indian
Penal Code registered at Police Station Shalimar Bagh, New Delhi and
FIR No.219/2006 under Sections 307/308/394/147/148/149/427/34
of Indian Penal Code registered at Police Station Shalimar Bagh, New
Delhi. Considering the facts and circumstances it is apparent that it will
be in the interest of justice if these two FIRs and proceedings emanating
therefrom are quashed.
Consequently, in the totality of facts and circumstances, FIR
No.726/2005 under Sections 308/323/379/147/148/149/34 of Indian
Penal Code registered at Police Station Shalimar Bagh, New Delhi
against petitioner Nos.1 to 6 and all the proceedings emanating
therefrom are quashed and FIR No.219/2006 under Sections
307/308/394/147/148/149/427/34 of Indian Penal Code registered at
Police Station Shalimar Bagh, New Delhi against petitioner Nos.7 to 14
and all the proceedings emanating therefrom are also quashed.
The petition is disposed of.
Dasti.
August 06th, 2008 ANIL KUMAR, J.
'k'
