Pradeep Kumar vs State & Anr.
2011 Latest Caselaw 6109 Del

$~34
*    IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+            CRL.M.C. No. 4131/2011

%            Judgment delivered on:13th December, 2011

PRADEEP KUMAR                                      ..... Petitioner
                              Through : Mr.Adnan Ahmad, Adv

                     versus

STATE & ANR.                                         ..... Respondent
                              Through : Mr.Navin Sharma, APP for State
                              with SI Neeraj Kumar, police station
                              Welcome Colony in person.
                              Mohd. Mobin, Adv for R-2 with respondent
                              in person.


CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT



SURESH KAIT, J. (Oral)

1. Notice issued.

2. Mr.Navin Sharma, learned APP on behalf of respondent No.1/State and Mr.Mobin, learned counsel on behalf of respondent No.2 accept notice.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that vide FIR No.106/2011 dated 20.03.2011 case under Section 323/452/506/504/34

Indian Penal Code, 1860 was registered against the petitioner at police station Welcome Colony, on the complaint of respondent No.2.

4. He further submitted that vide compromise deed dated 24.09.2011 got attested by Notary Public on 05.12.2011, matter has been resolved between the parties, therefore, respondent No.2 is no more interested in pursuing his case.

5. Respondent No.2 is present in the Court with his learned counsel Mr.Mobin, who has duly identified him as respondent No.2. In addition, respondent No.2 has produced his original voter identity card bearing No.YHL0638205, the photocopy whereof already placed on record. Original seen and returned to respondent No.2.

6. On instructions, learned counsel for the respondent No.2 submits that matter has been settled between the parties in pursuance to the compromise executed between them. Pursuant thereto, respondent No.2 is no more interested in pursuing his case and he has no objection, if the present FIR is quashed.

7. On the other hand, learned APP on instructions submits that the matter is pending for investigation. He further submitted that if this Court is inclined to quash the present FIR, heavy costs may be imposed upon the petitioner, as government machinery has been pressed into action and precious time of the Court has been consumed.

8. Keeping the settlement arrived between the parties, FIR No.106/2011 registered against the petitioner at police station Welcome Colony, is hereby quashed.

9. Though, I find force in the submission of learned APP for State, however, considering the fact that petitioner is employed at lower cadre i.e. Constable in Delhi Police, I refrain in imposing any costs upon him.

10. In view of above, Criminal M.C.No.4131/2011 is allowed and stands disposed of.

11. Dasti.

SURESH KAIT, J

DECEMBER 13, 2011 Mk