Ashok Kr. & Ors vs State
2011 Latest Caselaw 5811 Del

$~28
*      IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+              CRL.M.C. 3936/2011

%              Judgment delivered on:29th November, 2011

ASHOK KR. & ORS                                   ..... Petitioner
                                Through: Mr. O.S. Soran, Adv.

                    versus

STATE                                           ..... Respondent
                                Through: Mr.Naveen Sharma, APP for
                                State.
                                Inspr. Vijay Pal, PS-Kapashera.


CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT


SURESH KAIT, J. (Oral)

CRL. M.A. 18548/2011

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

+      CRL. M.C. 3936/2011

1.     Notice issued.

2. Ld. APP accepts notice on behalf of the State.

3. Ld. Counsel for petitioner submits that vide FIR no. 63 dated 11.03.2009 case under Section 325/34 IPC was registered against

petitioner no. 1, 2 & 3 on the complaint of petitioner no. 4.

4. He further submits during investigation Section 323/34 IPC were added whereas charge against the petitioner had been framed under Section 323/325/452/34 IPC.

5. Ld. Counsel further submits that petitioner no. 4 / complainant and petitioner no. 5 / injured have amicably settled all the issues qua aforesaid FIR and they do not want to pursue the case further.

6. Petitioner no. 4 & 5/injured are personally present in the Court. They have produced their Voter I-Card issued by Election Commission of India bearing no. NRX0592444 of petitioner no. 4/ Rameshwar and bearing no. DL/03/031/360497 of petitioner no. 5 / Dharampal.

7. They further submits that due to the intervention of the friends and locality persons, they have settled all the issues qua the aforesaid FIR and they do not want to pursue the case further and if the present FIR is quashed, they have no objection.

8. On the other ld. APP for State submits that if this Court is inclined to quash the FIR, then heavy costs should be imposed upon the petitioners, as the government machinery has been used and precious time of the Court has been consumed.

9. Keeping the settlement into view and the statement of petitioner no. 4 & 5, I deem it appropriate to quash the FIR with emanating proceedings thereto.

10. Though I found force in the submission of ld. APP, keeping in view the facts that petitioners belong to a lower strata of the society, I refrain to impose cost on them.

11. Accordingly, Crl. M.C. 3936/2011 stands disposed of as allowed.

12. Since Crl. M.C. 3936/2011 is allowed, Crl. M.A. 18547/2011 (Stay) become infructuous and dismissed as such.

13. Dasti.

SURESH KAIT, J

NOVEMBER 29, 2011 jg