Delhi High Court
Parvesh & Anr. vs The State (Govt Of Nct Of Delhi) & ... on 14 January, 2015
Author: Sunil Gaur
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of Decision: January 14, 2015
+ CRL.M.C. 5718/2014
PARVESH & ANR ..... Petitioners
Through: Ms. Sonia Malhotra, Advocate
versus
THE STATE (GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI) & ORS ...Respondents
Through: Mr. Parveen Bhati, Additional
Public Prosecutor for respondent-
State with ASI Pradeep Kumar and
HC Anil
Ms. Insha Goel, Advocate Mr.
R.K. Gautam, Advocate with
respondent No.2 & 3 in person
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR
JUDGMENT
% (ORAL)
Quashing of FIR No.279/2011, under Sections 323/324/34 of IPC
registered at police station Aman Vihar, Delhi is sought on the basis of
Mediated Settlement of 25th September, 2014 (Annexure P-2) and on the
ground that the misunderstanding which led to registration of the FIR
now stands cleared between the parties.
Notice.
Mr. Praveen Bhati, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for
respondent-State accepts notice and Ms. Isha Goel, Advocate, accepts
notice on behalf of respondents No.2 & 3.
CRL.M.C. 5718/2014 Page 1
Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent-State submits
that respondent No.2 & 3, present in the Court, are the complainant party
of the FIR in question and they have been identified to be so by their
counsel as well as by ASI Pradeep Kumar on the basis of identity proofs
produced by them.
Respondent No.2 & 3, present in the Court, submit that the dispute
between the parties has been amicably resolved vide aforesaid Mediated
Settlement and the terms thereof have been fully acted upon and that the
misunderstanding, which led to the incident in question, now stands
cleared between the parties. Respondent No.2 & 3 affirm the contents of
aforesaid Mediated Settlement and of their affidavit of 11th December,
2014 supporting this petition and submit that now no dispute with
petitioners survives and so, the proceedings arising out of the FIR in
question be brought to an end.
In „Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab‟ (2012) 10 SCC 303 Apex
Court has recognized the need of amicable resolution of disputes in cases
like the instant one, by observing as under:-
"61. In other words, the High Court must consider
whether it would be unfair or contrary to the interest of justice
to continue with the criminal proceedings or continuation of
criminal proceedings would tantamount to abuse of process of
law despite settlement and compromise between the victim and
the wrongdoer and whether to secure the ends of justice, it is
appropriate that criminal case is put to an end and if the
answer to the above question(s) is in the affirmative, the High
Court shall be well within its jurisdiction to quash the criminal
proceedings."
In the facts and circumstances of this case and in view of aforesaid
CRL.M.C. 5718/2014 Page 2
Mediated Settlement, I find that continuance of proceedings arising out of
the FIR in question would be an exercise in futility as the
misunderstanding, which led to registration of the FIR, now stands
cleared between the parties.
Accordingly, this petition is allowed subject to total cost of
`10,000/- to be deposited by the two petitioners with Prime Minister‟s
Relief Fund within two weeks from today. Upon placing on record the
receipt of cost, FIR No.279/2011, under Sections 323/324/34 of IPC
registered at police station Aman Vihar, Delhi and the proceedings
emanating therefrom shall stand quashed qua petitioners.
This petition is accordingly disposed of.
Dasti.
(SUNIL GAUR)
JUDGE
JANUARY 14, 2015
s
CRL.M.C. 5718/2014 Page 3
