Ajaypal & Ors. vs Mohit Nagar & Ors.
2012 Latest Caselaw 1679 Del

*               THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+                         Crl.M.C. No.890/2012

                                            Date of Decision: 12.03.2012

Ajaypal & Ors.                                       ...... Petitioners

                          Through:    Ms. Anupriya Yadav &             Mr.
                                      Gaurav Dalal, Advocates.

                                  Versus

Mohit Nagar & Ors.                                  ...... Respondents

                          Through:    Ms. Fizani Husain, APP for the
                                      State along with SI Rakesh Kumar,
                                      P.S. Bhajanpura.


CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.L. MEHTA


M.L. MEHTA, J. (Oral)

1. This is a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of FIR No.533/2011 registered at P.S. Bhajanpura under Section 452/387/307/34 IPC. The abovesaid FIR was registered on 19.12.2011 on the complaint of respondent No.1.

2. The allegations in the above named FIR were that on 18.12.2011 at about 9.45 P.M., respondent No.1, Mohit Nagar was sitting in his shop situated at Yamuna Vihar when suddenly three persons, namely Azad Singh, Devender and Lekhraj, who are petitioners

No.5, 4 and 3 respectively came to his shop and demanded money by threatening him. After this, respondent No.1 came out of his shop and raised an alarm. On hearing the shouting, public gathered there and got hold of Azad Singh and started beating him. Taking advantage of the confusion, the other two petitioners fled away from the spot and came back on motorcycles after some time with two other persons, namely Danish and Ajay Pal who are petitioners No.1 and 2 in the present petition. It was further stated that in the meanwhile respondent No.1's uncle, Vinay Yadav also came to the spot. At this point of time, all the four petitioners tried to release Azad Singh and started beating respondent No.1 and also his brother.

3. Not stopping at this, Danish who is also the B.C. of the area took out a pistol and started firing indiscriminately on the respondents and also the Police officials who had come to the spot to apprehend them. It was further stated that the Police also fired in the air and consequently all the five petitioners fled from the spot leaving behind their motorcycles. In this attack made by the petitioners, respondent No.1 received injuries on his left thigh and respondent No.2, who is his uncle, received bullet injury in his stomach.

4. In the meantime, it is stated that a compromise has been arrived at between the petitioners and the respondents on 17th February, 2012 wherein both the parties are stated to have settled their disputes amicably and hence the petitioners have pressed this petition for quashing of the abovementioned FIR.

5. In the exercise of its extraordinary jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C., this Court is within its power to quash the FIR even in non-compoundable offences. The only issue that arises in these circumstances is that whether the compounding of serious offences would serve the ends of justice or not. On the perusal of record and the status report filed by the SHO, P.S. Bhajanpura, it is evident that the offence committed by the petitioners is of grave nature. Not only have they tried to rob the respondent No.1 of his money by way of threatening, but have also audaciously fired at the respondents as well as the Police party. This action of the petitioners indicates total disregard to the law of the land and absence of fear even from the Police officials.

6. It is seen that petitioner No.2 is a habitual offender with as many as 14 similar cases pending against him and respondent No.1 is also involved in 4 similar cases charged against him. Not only that these petitioners have history of criminal record, but they have continued to threaten the public and indulge in serious offences like attempt to murder. The compounding of such serious offences are not to be allowed in a routine fashion, but only after careful perusal of the facts and circumstances of the case. Such brazen acts committed by the petitioners deserve no leniency from this Court and cannot be compounded merely because a settlement has been arrived at between the parties.

7. There can be many reasons which could have weighed on the minds of the respondents at the time of compromising the matter

such as fear of retaliation from the accused persons or involvement in litigation over a long period of time. Moreover, crime is not only an offence against an individual, but against the society as a whole and while considering the petition for quashing of FIR in such cases, the interest of the entire society must be considered.

8. This Court in Crl.M.C. No.247/2012 titled Najibur Rahman @ Mujibur Rehman & Anr. Vs. State & Ors. and Crl.M.C. No.3134/2011 titled Harsh Dabas & Anr. Vs. The State & Anr. has laid down specifically that compounding of serious offences will not be allowed only on the basis of settlement between the parties, but after having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case.

9. Keeping in mind the unprovoked attack by the petitioners and the criminal tendency of the petitioners, I am not inclined to permit the quashing of FIR No.533/2011.

10. The petition is hereby dismissed.

M.L. MEHTA (JUDGE) March 12, 2012 ss/skw