Citation : 2015 Latest Caselaw 8656 Del
Judgement Date : 20 November, 2015
$~20
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Judgment delivered on: 20th November, 2015
+ CRL.M.C. No.4680/2015
BHUPINDER PAL DHAMI & ORS
..... Petitioners
Represented by: Mr.Pramod Kumar, Adv
with petitioners in person.
versus
STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR
..... Respondents
Represented by: Mr.Kamal Kumar Ghei, APP
for the State with SI Mukesh,
PS Sagarpur, Delhi in
person.
Ms.Smita Kumari, Adv for
R2 with R2 in person.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT
SURESH KAIT, J. (Oral)
Crl. M.A. No.16820/2015 (Exemption) Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions. Accordingly, the application is allowed.
CRL.M.C. 4680/2015
1. Vide the present petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, petitioners seek quashing of FIR No.279/2012 registered at Police Station Sagarpur for the offences punishable under Sections 323/342/379/34 of the IPC and the consequential proceedings emanating therefrom against them.
2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submits that
the aforesaid case was registered on the complaint of respondent No.2, Avnish Kumar and police after investigation filed the charge sheet. Meanwhile, the respondent No.2 has amicably settled his disputes with the petitioners vide memorandum of understanding dated 15.10.2015. On reaching the settlement, respondent No.2 is no more interested to pursue his case anymore against petitioners and has no objection, if the present petition is allowed.
3. It is also submitted that out of the incident dated 27.10.2012, cross case vide FIR No.280/2012 was registered against respondent No.2 and other persons, which has since been settled. Accordingly, the parties have sought quashing of above FIR vide Crl.M.C.No.4679/2015.
4. Respondent No.2 is personally present in the Court through learned counsel, above named and has been duly identified by the Investigating Officer of the case. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 under instructions does not dispute as stated by learned counsel for petitioners and consequent to settlement respondent No.2 does not wish to pursue this case further and has no objection if the present petition is allowed.
5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the State submits that matter is at the initial stage of trial as only charge-sheet has been filed. Since the parties have amicably settled the matter and the respondent No.2/ complainant does not wish to pursue the case against the petitioners, therefore, looking to the overall circumstances, no useful purpose will be served in continuing the proceedings. Thus, the State has no objection if the present petition is allowed.
6. Undisputedly, offence punishable under Section 323/342/379/34 of
the IPC are compoundable and matter is at initial stage of trial as only charge sheet has been filed. The parties invoked the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 Cr P C, instead of moving learned Trial Court for compounding the matter.
7. Both the parties who are present in the Court today, approbate the aforesaid settlement dated 04.09.2015 and undertake to remain bound by the same.
8. In view of the above discussion, considering the settlement arrived at between the parties and the statement of respondent No.2 and the learned counsel for the State, I am of the considered opinion that this matter deserves to be given a quietus as continuance of proceedings arising out of the FIR in question would be an exercise in futility.
9. Consequently, FIR No.279/2012 registered at Police Station Sagarpur for the offences punishable under Sections 323/342/379/34 of the IPC and all proceedings emanating therefrom, are hereby quashed.
10. Accordingly, the present petition is allowed.
SURESH KAIT (JUDGE) NOVEMBER 20, 2015 M
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!