[email protected] & Ors. vs State Govt. Of Nct Of Delhi & Anr.
2015 Latest Caselaw 2461 Del

$~5
*     IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
                                          Date of Decision: March 23, 2015

+                         CRL.M.C. 1375/2012
      DUSHYANT @ DUSHI & ORS.              ..... Petitioners
                  Through: Mr. Sumit Choudhary, Advocate

                          versus

      STATE GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR.        .....Respondents
                    Through: Mr. Parveen Bhati, Additional Public
                             Prosecutor for respondent-State
      CORAM:
      HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR

                         JUDGMENT

% (ORAL)

Quashing of FIR No.121/2012 under Sections 323/325/341/506/186/ 353/332/34 of IPC and Sections 3 (1) (X) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act,1989 registered at P.S. Safdarjung Enclave, New Delhi is sought in this petition on the basis of settlement with respondent No.2.

At the hearing, learned counsel for petitioners had drawn the attention of this Court to order of 5th August, 2013 wherein it is noted that respondent No.2 had appeared in person and had confirmed the settlement and had given no objection to quashing of the FIR in question. It also stands noticed in the aforesaid order that petitioners had attacked the PCR van which had come to the spot at the time of incident and had pelted bricks and stones resulting in injuries to two police officials namely Nityanand and Umrao.

CRL.M.C. 1375/2012 Page 1 It is pertinent to note that the aforesaid police officials are not a party in this petition and vide order of 5th August, 2013, the hearing in this petition was deferred as it was found that Apex Court in 'Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab & Anr.' (2012) 10 SCC 303 has cautioned that in serious cases, FIRs should not be quashed.

Although it was submitted by learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent-State that the charge-sheet in this case has been filed not for the offence under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 but for the offences under Sections 183/332/353 of IPC which affects the society at large and so, the FIR in question does not deserve to be quashed.

Upon hearing and on perusal of the FIR of this case, the status report and affidavit of respondent No.2, I find that on the basis of settlement, the FIR of this case cannot be quashed for the reason that injured police officials are not party to this petition and the nature of offence purportedly committed is such which does not call for quashing of FIR in question in exercise of inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of Cr.P.C..

In view of aforesaid, this petition is dismissed while refraining to comment upon merits of this case.

                                                          (SUNIL GAUR)
                                                              JUDGE
      MARCH 23, 2015
      s




CRL.M.C. 1375/2012                                                        Page 2