Dinesh Singh & Ors vs State
2011 Latest Caselaw 6239 Del

$~53
*    IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+               CRL.M.C. No.4251/2011

%               Judgment delivered on:19th December, 2011

DINESH SINGH & ORS                                   ..... Petitioners
                                  Through : Mr.Vikas Bharti, Adv.

                        versus

STATE                                              ..... Respondents
                                  Through : Ms.Rajdipa Behura, APP for
                                  State.


CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT


SURESH KAIT, J. (Oral)

Crl.M.A.No.19570/2011(exemption)

Exemption is allowed subject to just exceptions. Criminal M.A. stands disposed of.

+        CRL.M.C. No.4251/2011

1.       Notice issued.

2. Ms.Rajdipa Behura, learned APP accepts notice on behalf of State.

3. Learned counsel for petitioners submit that instant petition is for quashing of the FIR No.107/2010 under Section 406/420/34 Indian Penal Code, 1860 registered at police station Kapeshera, Delhi on the complaint of petitioner No.1 against petitioner Nos.2 to 4.

4. Learned counsel for petitioners submits parties have compromised the matter and petitioner No.1 does not pursue his case anymore against petitioner Nos.2 to 4.

5. I note that the instant petition has been filed by petitioner No.1/ complainant and petitioner Nos.2 to 4/ accused persons for quashing of the FIR which has been registered under Section 406/420/34 Indian Penal Code, 1860 which falls under the category of compoundable offences as per Section 320 Indian Penal Code, 1860.

6. Petitioner No.1 is personally present in the Court and submits that he has settled all the issues with the petitioner Nos.2 to 4 qua the present FIR and he does not wish to pursue present case and he has no objection, if the present FIR is quashed.

7. Ms.Rajdipa Behura, learned APP for State, under instructions submits that the matter is pending for investigation and if this Court is inclined to quash the FIR, heavy costs should be imposed upon petitioner Nos.2 to 4, as government machinery has been put into action and precious time of the Court has been used.

8. Taking the settlement between the parties and submission of petitioner No.1, into view, FIR No.107/2010 registered at police station Kapeshera, Delhi against petitioner Nos.2 to 4 is hereby quashed.

9. I find force in the submission of learned APP for State regarding imposing costs.

10. Learned counsel for petitioners, on instruction from petitioner No.2 submits that he is voluntarily ready to contribute a sum of ` 25,000/- for some welfare purpose.

11. Accordingly, petitioner No.2 is directed to deposit the said amount of ` 25,000/- in favour of "Delhi Police Welfare Fund, PHQ, I.P. Estate, New Delhi" within two weeks from today. Proof thereof shall be placed on the record by petitioner No.2.

12. I refrain in imposing any costs upon petitioner Nos.3 & 4 due to the reasons that petitioner No.3 is a 'house-maker' lacking any source of income and petitioner No.4 is employed as Khlassi in Delhi University on a meagre monthly salary of ` 7,500/-.

13. Consequently, Criminal M.C.No.4251/2011 is allowed & stands disposed of.

14. Dasti.

SURESH KAIT, J DECEMBER 19, 2011 Mk