Delhi High Court
Azhar @ Azzu vs State & Anr. on 16 October, 2015
Author: Suresh Kait
$~33
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Judgment delivered on: 16th October, 2015
+ CRL.M.C. No.4301/2015
AZHAR @ AZZU
..... Petitioner
Represented by: Ms.Meenu Sharma, Adv
with petitioner in person.
versus
STATE & ANR.
..... Respondents
Represented by: Mr.Kamal Kumar Ghei, APP
for the State with SI Dinesh
Kumar, PS Jamia Nagar for
R1.
Mr.S.Qamar, Adv for R2
with R2/complainant in
person.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT
SURESH KAIT, J. (Oral)
1. Vide the present petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973, petitioner seeks quashing of FIR
No.1026/2012 registered at Police Station Jamia Nagar, New Delhi for the
offences punishable under Sections 323/341 of the IPC and the
consequential proceedings emanating therefrom against him.
2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that
the aforesaid case was registered on the complaint of respondent No.2,
Abdul Gaffer on a scuffle took place due to misunderstanding, wherein
he received injuries. The wife of petitioner also received injuries
regarding which cross FIR bearing No.1025/2012 was also registered, the
quashing whereof has been allowed today itself vide
Crl.M.C.No.4330/2015. The police charge sheeted the petitioner, and after
framing of charges matter is pending trial before learned Trial Court. The
petitioner has settled his disputes with the respondent No.2 with the
intervention of common friends and respectable members of society as
both parties are living in vicinity. Pursuant to such settlement, respondent
No.2 does not wish to pursue his case against petitioner and has no
objection, if the present petition is allowed.
3. Respondent No.2 is personally present in the Court through his
learned counsel above named and has also been identified by the
Investigating Officer of the case. For his identification, original EPIC
No.NWD 0606145 has been produced. Original seen and returned to
respondent No.2. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 under instructions
does not dispute the submission made by learned counsel for petitioner.
He submits that on the date of the incident due to some misunderstanding
a scuffle took place in which he was injured. Further submit that the
matter has been settled with the petitioner, thus, he does not wish to
pursue this case further and has no objection if the present petition is
allowed.
4. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the
State submits that matter is pending trial against petitioner after framing
of charge before learned Trial Court. Since the parties have amicably
settled the matter and the respondent No.2/complainant does not wish to
pursue the case against the petitioner, 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.
5. Undisputedly, offence punishable under Section 323/341 of the IPC
are compoundable and both the parties should have approached learned
Trial Court for compounding of the offence rather to approach this Court.
However, the cross-case FIR involving non-compoundable offence vide
Crl.M C No.4330/2015 is also filed in this Court.
6. In view of above, considering the settlement arrived at between the
parties and the statements 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.
7. Consequently, FIR No.1026/2012 registered at Police Station Jamia
Nagar, New Delhi for the offences punishable under Sections 323/341 of
the IPC and all proceedings emanating therefrom, are hereby quashed.
8. In view of the above, the present petition is allowed.
Crl. M.A. No.15222/2015 (for Stay)
Dismissed as infructuous.
SURESH KAIT
(JUDGE)
OCTOBER 16, 2015
M
