Anil Kumar & Ors. vs State
2012 Latest Caselaw 510 Del

$~3
*     IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+     CRL.REV.P. 582/2011
%             Judgment delivered on: 24th January, 2012


      ANIL KUMAR & ORS.               ..... Petitioners
                   Through : Mr.Narveer Dabas, Adv.


                      Versus


      STATE                                             ..... Respondent
                                 Through : Mr.Satish Mishra, Adv for
                                 Ms.Rajdipa Behura, APP for State.
      CORAM:
      HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT

                  ORDER

%                  24.01.2012


SURESH KAIT, J. (Oral)

1. Vide the instant petition, the petitioner has sought for compounding of offences registered vide FIR No. 152/2007 under Sections 323/341/506/34 Indian Penal Code, 1860 at PS Railway Station, Delhi.

2. Ld. counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner/complainant Suresh Kumar is no more interested in pursuing the case further. Therefore, the instant petition may be allowed.

3. The petitioner/complainant Suresh Kumar is present in person and for his identification he has produced his office identity card No.2124 issued by the office of District and Sessions Judge, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi, which has been seen and returned to him.

4. I note that the present petition has been filed jointly by the petitioners No. 1 to 4 and the petitioner no. 5, the complainant.

5. Ld. counsel submits that initially they moved an application before the ld. Metropolitan Magistrate, but the same was dismissed vide order dated 21.09.2011. Being aggrieved, the petitioner has filed the instant petition.

6. The petitioner No. 5/complainant submits that he has settled all the issues qua the aforesaid FIR registered against the petitioners no. 1 to 4 and he is no more interested in pursuing the case further. He has no objection if the present FIR is quashed.

7. Learned APP on the other hand submits that if this court is inclined to quash the FIR in the present case, then heavy costs should be imposed upon the petitioners No.1 to 4 as in the process, Government Machinery has been consumed and precious time of the court has been misused.

8. Keeping in view the statement of the petitioner No.5/complainant, and in the interest of justice, the FIR No. 152/2007 and all criminal proceedings emanating therefrom are hereby quashed.

9. However, keeping in view the financial position of the petitioners no. 1 to 4 who are class-III Government employees, I refrain from imposing costs upon them.

10. CRL.REV.P. 582/2011 is allowed in the aforesaid terms.

SURESH KAIT, J

JANUARY 24, 2012 RS