Delhi High Court
Ashok Kumar Aggarwal vs Govt. Of Nct Of Delhi & Ors. on 15 December, 2011
Author: Suresh Kait
$~62
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CRL.M.C. No. 4193/2011
% Judgment delivered on: 15th December, 2011
ASHOK KUMAR AGGARWAL ......Petitioner
Through : Mr. Anurag K. Aggarwal and
Mr. Umesh Mishra, Advocates
versus
GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through : Ms. Rajdipa Behura, APP for
the State
Mr. Shailender Singh, Advocate
for R-2 to R-6.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT
SURESH KAIT, J. (Oral)
1. Notice.
2. Learned APP accepts notice on behalf of the State.
3. Learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos. 2 to 6 also
accepts notice on behalf of respondents.
4. Parties are identified by their respective counsels.
5 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that vide FIR No.
131/2011 dated 19th September, 2011 a case was registered under Sec.
304A registered with PS Sonia Vihar, against the petitioner on the DD
Entry No. 11-A by the police, at PS Sonia Vihar.
6. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner is proprietor
of M/s. Tarun Electricals which carries on work of maintenance of
electrical installations of BSES Yamuna Power Ltd on annual
maintenance contract basis. On 19th September, 2011, the deceased
Harvir Singh S/o Bhikari Singh died on account of fall from an electric
pole while he was performing his duties. The deceased was taken to the
hospital where he was declared 'brought dead'.
7. Learned counsel further submitted that the respondent Nos. 2 to
6 are the legal heirs of the deceased and they do not want to prosecute
the aforesaid FIR against the petitioner and they do not want to
proceed any further either before the court or tribunal for recovery of
any compensation of damages in relation to the death of the deceased
due to the reasons that vide the compromise agreement dated 28 th
November, 2011, the matter has been settled between the respondent
No.2 to 6. The petitioner i.e. M/s Tarun Electricals agreed to pay an
amount of Rs.4 lac to the family of the deceased as compensation and
part payment of Rs.20,000/- has already been advanced in the name of
Smt. Rakesh Wati @ Rakesh Devi W/o late Sh. Harvir Singh vide
cheque No. 732235 dated 28th November, 2011.
8. Learned counsel further submits that balance of Rs. 3.8 lac has
been brought today vide demand drafts Nos. 147458 favouring Sanuj
Chaudhary for Rs. 10,000/-, 147459 favouring Radha Chaudhary for
Rs. 2 lac, 147460 favouring Deepa Chaudhary for Rs. 1.5 lac, 147461
favouring Rakesh Devi for Rs.10,000/- and 147462 favouring Rajo for
Rs.10,000/- all dated 3rd December, 2011. The same has handed over to
Smt. Rakesh Wati @ Rakesh Devi who is wife of the deceased. She
has accepted the same without any protest.
9. Learned counsel further submits that Rs.1 lac and pension will
also be paid the family of the deceased as ESI benefits. The wife of the
deceased namely Rakesh Wati @ Rakesh Devi as well as the mother of
the deceased namely Smt. Rajo, respondent Nos. 3 and 2 respectively
are present in the Court with their counsels.
10. Learned counsel for respondent Nos. 2 to 6, on instructions,
submits that respondents are satisfied with the compensation received
from the petitioners. Therefore, they are no more interesting to pursue
the case mentioned above.
11. Learned counsel further submits that on this juncture, the family
is in need and that is why without filing their claim in the tribunal they
will receive the compensation and they have accepted the same.
Otherwise getting compensation shall take substantial time in the Court
and since the matter has been settled fully with the petitioner,
therefore, the respondents have no objection if the present FIR is
quashed.
12. Learned APP on the other hand submits that in the instant case
one young life has been lost and compensation of Rs.4 lac is not
sufficient. The deceased belonged to a very poor family. She has
requested this Court to increase the compensation while quashing the
FIR.
13. I find force in the submissions of learned APP. Keeping the fact
and circumstances of the case in view and the need of the family of the
deceased at this juncture, I impose costs of Rs. 1 lac upon the petitioner
to be paid in favour of the wife of the deceased. The said amount of
cost shall be paid within one week by the petitioner by way of demand
draft in favour of respondent No.3 I further direct respondent No.3
Smt. Rakesh Wati @ Rakesh Devi that the said money shall be kept in
FDR initially for a period of three years.
14. Keeping the compromise, and the facts and circumstances of the
case in view, I am of the view that the substantial justice would be if I
quash the FIR.
15. The aforesaid FIR No. 131/2011 registered at PS Sonia Vihar
and the criminal proceedings emanating therefrom are accordingly
quashed.
16. CRL.M.C. 4193/2011 stands disposed of.
SURESH KAIT, J
DECEMBER 15, 2011
'RAJ'/RS
