Single judge order allowing a petition for quashing of an FIR under Sections 451, 354, 509, and 506 IPC. The High Court quashed the FIR and related proceedings noting that the parties had amicably settled the matter voluntarily.
FIR No. 635/2015 and proceedings pursuant thereto are hereby quashed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
23# $~
| * | IN THE HIGH COURT OF DE | LHI AT NEW DELHI |
|---|---|---|
| + | CRL.M.C. 132/2017 | |
| SHIBU YADAV Represented by: versus |
..... Petitioner Mr. Dhan Mohan, Ms. Tanu B. Mishra and Mr. Sarthak, Advocates. with petitioner in person. |
|
| STATE NCT OF DELHI & ORS. Represented by: |
..... Respondents Mr. Hirein Sharma, APP for the State with SI Shri Gopal, PS Shakarpur. |
|
| Respondent Nos. 2 to 4 in person. |
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA
O R D E R % 13.01.2017
Crl. M.A. No. 660/2017 (Exemption)
Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
CRL.M.C. 132/2017
By the present petition the petitioner seeks quashing of FIR No. 635/2015 under Sections 451/354/509/506 IPC registered at PS Shakarpur, Delhi on the complaint of Respondent No.2 and the proceedings pursuant thereto on the ground that the parties have settled the matter.
Issue notice.
Learned APP accepts notice on behalf of the state.
Learned APP for the State on instructions from Investigating Officer
CRL.M.C. 132/2017 Page 1 of 3
submits that besides the respondent Nos. 2 and 3 who are the victims, one more victim, that is, Karanjeet Kumar son of respondent Nos. 2 and 3 was also a victim, who has not been impleaded as party. Learned APP further informs that the petitioner is the only accused in the above noted FIR.
Learned counsel for the petitioner seeks leave to amend the memo of parties. Leave granted.
Amended memo of parties is taken on record. .
Respondent Nos. 2, 3, and 4 who are present in Court and are identified by the Investigating Officer state that they have settled the matter with the petitioner and do not wish to pursue the above-noted FIR and the proceedings pursuant thereto.
The petitioner who is present in Court and is identified by the learned counsel affirms the statement of respondent Nos.2 to 4 and while unconditionally apologising, assures that no such misbehaviour will take place in future with anybody.
In view of the fact that the parties have amicably resolved their differences of their own free will, volition and without any coercion and no useful purpose will be served in continuance of the proceedings, rather the same would create further acrimony between them, it would be in the interest of justice to quash the abovementioned FIR and the proceedings pursuant thereto. There is no legal impediment in quashing the FIR in question.
Consequently, FIR No. 635/2015 under Sections 451/354/509/506 IPC registered at PS Shakarpur, Delhi and proceedings pursuant thereto are hereby quashed.
CRL.M.C. 132/2017
Page 2 of 3
Parties have signed this order sheet in acknowledgment of their statements made before this Court.
Petition is disposed of. Order dasti.
MUKTA GUPTA, J.
JANUARY 13, 2017 ‘vn’
Page 3 of 3
CRL.M.C. 132/2017
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the FIR under Sections 451/354/509/506 IPC should be quashed in view of the settlement reached between the parties.
Whether the proceedings pursuant to the FIR should be quashed on the ground that no useful purpose will be served in their continuance.
Whether an amendment to the memo of parties to implead an additional victim is allowable.
Shibu Yadav
State NCT of Delhi
Respondent No. 2
Respondent No. 3
Respondent No. 4
Mukta Gupta
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
