Tushar vs The State & Anr
2020 Latest Caselaw 2500 Del

$~9
*     IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
                                               Date of decision: 26.08.2020

+     CRL.M.C. 1515/2020
      TUSHAR                                              ..... Petitioner
                           Through       Mr.Ravin Rao, Adv.

                           versus

      THE STATE & ANR                                      ..... Respondents
                    Through              Mr.Panna Lal Sharma, APP for the
                                         State.
                                         W/SI Dinesh Kumari, PS Rani Bagh
                                         with R-2 through Video Conferencing
                                         Mr.Akshit Sawal, Adv. for R-2.

      CORAM:
      HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KUMAR KAIT
                  J U D G M E N T (ORAL)

1. The hearing has been conducted through video conferencing.

2. Vide the present petition, petitioner seeks direction thereby for

quashing of FIR No.63/2020 dated 08.02.2020, registered at PS - Rani Bagh,

Delhi and all other proceedings arising therefrom.

3. Pursuant to order dated 16.06.2020, Respondent No.2 who is present in

the Court through video conferencing and with the consent of counsel for

parties, the present petition is taken up for final disposal.

4. The present petition is filed on the ground that parties have settled their

disputes and respondent No.2 has given an undertaking which is annexed with

the petition and the relevant para of the affidavit is reproduced as under:

"The subject FIR was registered by my due to anger and wrong advice as I had been accused of theft of Rs.25,000/- by the petitioner, whereas no theft as alleged ever took place and the said amount was found by the petitioner himself in his almirah. The petitioner did not establish any forceful physical relations with me and did not commit any rape on me."

5. Respondent No.2 has been identified by W/SI Dinesh Kumari/IO and

submits that matter has been settled and she does not wish to prosecute the

matter any further.

6. Petitioner and respondent No.2 have entered into an amicable

settlement vide compromise deed dated 14.06.2020.

7. Though as per the directions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Parbat

Bhai Aahir and Ors. vs. State of Gujrat & Ors.: AIR 2017 SC 4843, the FIR

should not be quashed in case of rape as it is an heinous offence, but when the

respondent no.2/complainant/prosecutrix herself takes the initiative and

makes affidavits before this Court, stating that she made the complaint due to

some misunderstanding and now wants to give quietus to the

misunderstanding which arose between the petitioner and respondent no.2, in

my considered opinion, in such cases, there will be no purpose in continuing

with the trial. Ultimately, if such direction is issued, the result will be of

acquittal in favour of the accused, but substantial public time shall be wasted.

8. Moreover, as per the FSL report, DNA of the petitioner and prosecutrix

do not match. Though as per the affidavit of prosecutrix/respondent no.2, she

is liable to be prosecuted, however, I refrain myself from taking any action

against her.

9. Taking into account the aforesaid facts, this Court is inclined to quash

FIR as no useful purpose would be served in prosecuting petitioner any

further.

10. For the reasons afore-recorded, FIR No.63/2020 dated 08.02.2020,

registered at PS - Rani Bagh, Delhi and consequent proceedings emanating

therefrom are quashed.

11. The petition is, accordingly, allowed and disposed of.

12. The order be uploaded on the website forthwith. Copy of the order be

also forwarded to the learned counsel through email.

(SURESH KUMAR KAIT) JUDGE AUGUST 26, 2020/ab