Harbhajan Singh vs State & Anr.
2018 Latest Caselaw 3836 Del

$~4
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

%                                   Judgment delivered on: 10.07.2018

+      CRL.M.C. 3258/2018
HARBHAJAN SINGH                                            ..... Petitioner

                           versus

STATE & ANR                                             ..... Respondents
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Petitioner :       Ms.Meena Devi, Mr.Manish Malik and Mr.Jai
                           Shubash Thakur, Advocates.

For the Respondent:        Ms.Neelam Sharma, APP for the State with SI
                           Ramakant from Police Station-Sarai Rohilla.
                           Respondent No.2 in person.

CORAM:-
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA

                              JUDGMENT

10.07.2018

SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J. (ORAL)

1. The petitioner seeks quashing of FIR No. 890 of 2014 under Sections 354-D/509 of the IPC at Police Station Sarai Rohilla, New Delhi, based on a settlement.

2. It is contended that the FIR was lodged on the allegations that the petitioner had persistently misbehaved with the complainant and made obscene gestures.

3. Learned counsels for the parties submit that the parties have settled their disputes. The petitioner has expressed remorse and apologised to respondent no.2.

4. Respondent no.2 is present in court in person and is identified by counsel and submits that since the petitioner has expressed remorse and apologised, she does not wish to prosecute her complaint any further.

5. In view of the fact that the disputes between the petitioner and respondent no. 2 have been settled, 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 there from.

6. In view of the above, the petition is allowed. FIR No. 890 of 2014 under Sections 354-D/509 of the IPC at Police Station Sarai Rohilla, New Delhi, and the consequent proceedings there from are, accordingly quashed, subject to payment of costs Rs.10,000/- to be paid to Delhi High Court Bar Association Employees Welfare Fund within a period of two weeks. Receipt of deposit of cost be furnished to the Investigating Officer, within three weeks.

7. Order Dasti under signatures of the Court Master.

SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J JULY 10, 2018/ssc