Delhi High Court
Jaswant & Anr. vs The State (Govt. Of Nct Of Delhi) & ... on 20 January, 2015
Author: Sunil Gaur
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of Decision: January 20, 2015
+ (i) CRL.M.C. 4412/2014
JASWANT & ANR ..... Petitioners
Through: Mr. Amit Soni, Advocate
versus
THE STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI) & ORS
..... Respondents
Through: Mr.Navin Sharma, Additional
Public Prosecutor for respondent-
State with SI Deepak
Mr. Sunil Kumar, Advocate with
complainant party in person
+ (ii) CRL.M.C. 4428/2014
RAHUL @ LALIT & ORS ..... Petitioners
Through: Mr. Sunil Kumar, Advocate
versus
STATE & ORS .....Respondents
Through: Mr.Navin Sharma, Additional
Public Prosecutor for respondent-
State with SI Deepak
Mr. Amit Soni, Advocate with
complainant party in person
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR
JUDGMENT
% (ORAL)
In the above-captioned two petitions, quashing of FIRs i.e. FIR
No.238/2014 under Sections 323/34 of IPC and FIR No.239/2014 under
Sections 458/323/324/34 of IPC both registered at P.S.Sadar Bazar, New
Crl.M.Cs.4412 & 4428 of 2014 Page 1
Delhi is sought on basis of Settlement of 23rd May, 2014.
With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, both these
petitions were heard together and by this common judgment, they are
being disposed of as both these petitions pertain to one incident.
Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent-State submits
that the complainant parties as well as accused persons of these two
petitions are present in the Court and they have been identified to be so
by their respective counsel as well as by SI Deepak on the basis of
identity proofs produced by them.
Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent-State on
instructions from the Investigating Officer of this case submits that both
the sides have clean antecedents.
Complainant parties of these two petitions, present in the Court,
submit that the incident in question took place on a trivial issue and the
misunderstanding, which led to the incident in question, now stands
cleared between the parties vide aforesaid Settlement and the terms
thereof have been fully acted upon. Complainant parties of these two
petitions affirm the contents of aforesaid Settlement and of their affidavits
filed in support of these two petitions and submit that now no dispute
with petitioners-accused persons survives and so, to restore the cordiality
amongst the parties, who are residing in the same locality, 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
Crl.M.Cs.4412 & 4428 of 2014 Page 2
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
Settlement and the fact that the incident in question took place on a trivial
issue, 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, the above captioned two petitions are allowed subject
to cost of `10,000/- per petition to be deposited by petitioners with Prime
Minister‟s Relief Fund within four weeks from today. Upon placing on
record the receipt of cost, FIR No.238/2014 under Sections 323/34 of IPC
[in Crl.M.C. 4412/2014] and FIR No.239/2014 under Sections
458/323/324/34 of IPC both registered at P.S. Sadar Bazar, New Delhi [in
Crl.M.C.4428/2014] and the proceedings emanating therefrom shall stand
quashed qua petitioners-accused persons.
The above captioned two petitions are accordingly disposed of.
Dasti.
(SUNIL GAUR)
JUDGE
JANUARY 20, 2015
s
Crl.M.Cs.4412 & 4428 of 2014 Page 3
