Vinay Agarwal vs State Nct Of Delhi & Anr
2017 Latest Caselaw 4687 Del

$~31
*      IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+      CRL.M.C. 3516/2017
       VINAY AGARWAL                                       ..... Petitioner
                          Through: Mr.Aman Khan, Advocate along with
                          petitioner in person.

                          versus

       STATE NCT OF DELHI & ANR                      ..... Respondent
                     Through: Mr.Tarang Srivastava, APP for State
                     along with SI Ajit Singh, PS Greater Kailash,
                     Delhi.
                     Mr.Sheikh Israr Ahmad, Advocate for R-2 along
                     with respondent no. 2 in person.

       CORAM:
       HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD GOEL
                    ORDER

% 01.09.2017 Crl.M.A. 14337/2017 (exemption) Exemption allowed subject to all just exceptions. Application is disposed of.

CRL.M.C. 3516/2017

1. Notice. Learned APP, who appears on an advance copy having been served, accepts notice.

2. Notice to respondent no. 2 also. She is present in court and accepts notice. She is being represented by her counsel. She is duly identified by IO SI Ajit Singh.

3. The petitioner has approached this court under Section 482 of the

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short 'Cr.PC') for quashing of the FIR bearing No. 23/2014, registered against him on 13.01.2014 with Police Station Greater Kailash, South East District, Delhi under Section 354/509/506/34 IPC on the complaint of respondent No.2.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner and respondent no. 2 submit that the respondent no. 2 is residing on the ground floor whereas the petitioner is residing on the second floor of the building i.e. B-9, Kailash Colony, New Delhi-110048.

5. It is submitted that cross FIR bearing No. 22/2014 and 23/2014 PS Greater Kailash were registered by both the parties on the same day. Later on, one FIR No. 47/2014 was also registered on the complaint of respondent no. 2 against the wife and driver of the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner as also of the respondent no. 2 submit that in view of the settlement, said FIR No. 22/2014 and 47/2014, have already been compounded by the Trial Court. It is further submitted that due to some misunderstanding between the petitioner and the respondent no. 2 these cases came to be registered against each other.

6. The respondent No.2 present in the Court states that she had amicably settled the matter with the petitioner. She submits that in view of the settlement, the offence under Section 509 is allowed to be compounded by the learned Trial Court on 02.04.2016. She submits that she does not want to pursue the said FIR. She further submits that the said FIR may be quashed.

7. Learned APP through the I.O. submits that the charge sheet has

already been filed against the petitioner under Section 354/509 of IPC and charges have been framed against the petitioner.

8. Subsequent to the framing of the charges, the parties have amicably settled all their disputes on 02.04.2016.

9. In the circumstances when the matter has been settled between the parties, no purpose would be served in further pursuing the said FIR. Hence, to secure ends of justice and have peace and harmony in the society, the FIR bearing No. 23/2014, registered against the petitioner on 13.01.2014 with Police Station Greater Kailash, Delhi under Section 354/509/506/34 IPC and proceedings arising out of the same are hereby quashed.

10. The petition is disposed of accordingly.

11. Dasti.

VINOD GOEL, J.

SEPTEMBER 01, 2017 "shailendra"