Delhi High Court
Sabir & Ors vs The State ( Nct Of Delhi) & Ors on 21 December, 2018
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of Order: December 21, 2018
+ Crl.M.C. 6566/2018 & CRL.M.A. 50495/2018
SABIR & ORS .....Petitioners
Through: Mr. Aditya Gaur and Mr. Pankaj
Gupta, Advocates
Versus
THE STATE ( NCT OF DELHI) & ORS .....Respondents
Through: Mr. M.P. Singh, Additional Public
Prosecutor, with ASI Ram Lal
Respondents No.2 & 3 in person
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR
ORDER
(ORAL)
1. Quashing of FIR No. 23/2015, under Sections 323/341/308/34 of
IPC. registered at police station Malviya Nagar, Delhi is sought on the
basis of Memorandum of Understanding dated 10th October, 2018
(Annexure- B).
2. Upon notice, Mr. M.P. Singh, learned Additional Public Prosecutor
for respondent-State submits that respondents No.2 & 3 are the
complainant party of FIR in question and they are present in the Court
and have been identified to be so, by ASI Ram Lal on the basis of identity
proof furnished by them.
3. Respondents No.2 & 3 submit that the dispute between the parties
has been amicably resolved vide aforesaid Memorandum of
Understanding dated 10th October, 2018 (Annexure- B) and terms thereof
have been fully acted upon and that the misunderstanding, which led to
the incident in question, now stands cleared between the parties.
Respondents No.2 & 3 affirm the contents of their affidavits supporting
this petition and submit that now no dispute with petitioners survives and
so, to restore the cordiality amongst the parties, the proceedings arising
out of the FIR in question be brought to an end.
4. In „Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab‟ (2012) 10 SCC 303 Supreme
Court has recognized the need of amicable resolution of disputes in cases
like the instant one, by observing as under:-
"61. In other words, the High Court must consider
whether it would be unfair or contrary to the interest of justice
to continue with the criminal proceedings or continuation of
criminal proceedings would tantamount to abuse of process of
law despite settlement and compromise between the victim and
the wrongdoer and whether to secure the ends of justice, it is
appropriate that criminal case is put to an end and if the
answer to the above question(s) is in the affirmative, the High
Court shall be well within its jurisdiction to quash the criminal
proceedings."
5. In the facts and circumstances of this case and in view of aforesaid
Memorandum of Understanding dated 10th October, 2018 (Annexure- B),
I find that continuance of proceedings arising out of the FIR in question
would be an exercise in futility as the misunderstanding, which led to
registration of the FIR, now stands cleared between the parties.
6. Accordingly, this petition is allowed subject to cost of `10,000/- to
be deposited by petitioners with Prime Minister‟s Relief Fund within four
weeks from today. Upon placing on record the receipt of cost before this
Court as well as trial court, FIR No. 23/2015, under Sections
323/341/308/34 of IPC registered at police station Malviya Nagar, Delhi
and the proceedings emanating therefrom shall stand quashed.
7. With the aforesaid directions this petition and application are
accordingly disposed of.
DASTI.
(SUNIL GAUR)
JUDGE
DECEMBER 21, 2018
p‟ma
