Smt. Anita & Ors. vs State & Ors.
2009 Latest Caselaw 2637 Del

                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI

                     Crl.M.C.No. 1449/2009

                                  Date of decision: 15th July, 2009.

     Smt. Anita & Ors.                    ... Petitioner
           through: Mr. R.K. Kashyap, Adv. for petitioner with
                    petitioners in person

                             VERSUS

     State & Ors.                          ....Respondents
            through: Ms. Fizani Husain, APP for the state with SI Pratap
                    Singh from PS Nangloi
                    Mr. G.D. Sharma, Av. For the respondent no. 2 with
                    respondent no. 2

CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE GITA MITTAL

        1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see
             the Judgment?
        2. To be referred to the Reporter or not?
        3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?

GITA MITTAL, J(Oral)

1.    This petition has been filed under the provisions of Section 482

of the CrPC praying for quashing of the proceedings arising out of FIR

No. 80/05 registered by the police station Nangloi u/s 324/34 of the

Indian Penal Code.      The complainant Ms. Kalpana is arrayed as

respondent no. 2.      She is personally present in court alongwith

counsel. The investigating officer SI Pratap Singh has identified the

complainant and the petitioners who are the accused persons in the

said case.
                                  -2-

2.   The petitioners have stated that the parties are neighbours and

the matter arose out of a misunderstanding between them.             The

petitioner no. 3 was a juvenile at the time of occurrence. In order to

restore cordiality in the relations between the parties, they have

mutually settled all disputes.

3.   It is stated by the complainant, respondent no. 2 before this

court that she has filed an affidavit on record wherein it is deposed

that it is her desire not to proceed with the prosecution of the criminal

case and that she has settled the matter after fully understanding the

impact of the same.     The respondent no. 2 has been questioned in

court and she submits that the matter may be compounded.             The

statements of the respondent no. 2 to this effect appears to be

voluntary.

4.   On a consideration of the matter, it would appear that the

complaint arose out of disputes between neighbours which they have

mutually resolved.    The disputes were of a private nature.         The

respondent no. 2 has made a prayer to this court to permit the

compounding of the case.

5.   Having regard to the above facts and circumstances, it would

appear to be in the interests of justice to permit the compounding of

the case and the disputes which are of a private nature. The parties
                                  -3-

have stated that they be permitted to co-exist in a spirit of

neighbourliness.

     In view of the statement of the respondent no. 2 who does not

wish to prosecute the case, it will be an exercise in futility to continue

the prosecution.

     Accordingly, it is directed that all proceedings arising out of FIR

No. 80/05 registered by the police station Nangloi u/s 324/34 of the

Indian Penal Code in the case entitled State v. Anita & Ors. which are

currently stated to be pending in the court of Sh. Gaurav Rao, MM,

Delhi and any other proceedings arising out of the FIR shall stand

quashed.

     This petition is allowed in the above terms.

     Dasti



July 15, 2009                                Gita Mittal, J.

kr