Jai Ram @ Hunny vs State & Anr.
2018 Latest Caselaw 5078 Del

$~76
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
%                                  Judgment delivered on: 27.08.2018

+      CRL.M.C. 4307/2018
       JAI RAM @ HUNNY                                    ..... Petitioner

                          versus
       STATE & ANR.                                   ..... Respondents
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Petitioners :     Ms. Surbhi Kohli with Mr. Ayush Dua, Advocates

For the Respondents:      Mr. Manish Kumar, Advocate for R-2
                          SI Om Prakash, PS: Desh Bandhu Gupta Road.

CORAM:-
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA
                             JUDGMENT

27.08.2018

SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J. (ORAL)

Crl.M.A.30724/2018 (exemption)

Exemption is allowed subject to all just exceptions.

CRL.M.C. 4307/2018 & CRL.M.A. 30723/2018 (stay)

1. The petitioner seeks quashing of FIR No. 204/2017 under Sections 354/354A/354B/506/509/323 IPC of Police Station Desh Bandhu Gupta Road.

2. Petitioner is the brother-in-law of respondent no. 2 the

complainant. It is contended that there are disputes between respondent no.2 and her in-laws. Subject FIR has been registered alleging that the petitioner had mis-behaved with respondent no. 2.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the parties have settled their dispute before the Delhi Mediation Centre, Tis Hazari Courts.

4. As per the settlement, a total amount of Rs. 1,50,000/- is to be paid to respondent no. 2. A sum of Rs. 1 lac has already been paid. Another sum of Rs. 25,000/- has been paid today in Court, by way of Demand Draft No. 558779 dated 21st August, 2018, drawn on Karur Vysya Bank Limited. The balance amount of Rs. 25,000/- is to be paid to respondent no. 2, when she vacates the matrimonial house.

5. Respondent no.2 is present in Court in person, represented by counsel and identified by the Investigating Officer. She submits that she has settled her disputes with the petitioner and does not wish to press charges against the petitioner and prosecute the complaint any further.

6. In view of the fact that parties have fully and finally settled their disputes and the respondent No.2 has stated that she does not wish to press the complaint any further, continuation of criminal proceedings will be an exercise in futility and justice in the case demands that the dispute between the parties is put to an end and

peace is restored; securing the ends of justice being the ultimate guiding factor. It would be expedient to quash the subject FIR and the consequent proceedings emanating therefrom.

7. In view of the above, FIR No. 204/2017 under Sections 354/354A/354B/506/509/323 IPC of Police Station Desh Bandhu Gupta Road and the consequent proceedings emanating there from are quashed.

8. Order Dasti under the signatures of the Court Master.

SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J AUGUST 27, 2018 P