Quashed

Suraj v. the State ( Govt of NCT of Delhi) & Anr.

Delhi HC5 May 2017CRL.M.C./1791/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court quashed FIR No. 178/2013 under Section 304A IPC and subsequent proceedings. The decision was based on the stenographer's report indicating that all legal heirs of the deceased had settled the matter and did not wish to pursue the case against the petitioner.

What did the court decide?

Quashment of FIR No. 178/2013 under Sections 304A IPC registered at PS Ashok Vihar, Delhi and proceedings pursuant thereto.

Suraj Vs the State ( Govt of NCT of Delhi) & Anr. — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Delhi HC (2017)

¶1

$~22

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

CRL.M.C. 1791/2016 SURAJ ..... Petitioner Represented by: Mr. Asbhishek Gupta, Adv.

¶4

versus

¶5

THE STATE ( GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI) & ANR

¶6

..... Respondent Represented by: Mr. Ashok Kr. Garg, APP with ASI Raj Kumar PS Ashok Vihar. R-2 in person.

¶7

CORAM:

¶8

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA

¶9

O R D E R % 05.05.2017

¶10

By the present petition the petitioner seeks quashing of FIR No. 178/2013 under Sections 304A IPC registered at PS Ashok Vihar, Delhi lodged on the complaint of Head Constable Ashok Kumar Meena and the proceedings pursuant thereto on the ground that the parties have settled the matter.

¶11

Learned APP for the State on instructions from Investigating Officer submits that the above-noted FIR was registered when the deceased Kashi Nathy Pandey went to visit his friend, the petitioner herein and due to waterlogging got electrocuted. Respondents No.2 to 6 are the legal heirs of deceased Kashi Nath Pandey being his son, wife, two daughters and the mother respectively.

¶12

CRL.M.C. 1791/2016

¶13

page 1 of 3

¶14

On the last date of hearing i.e. 22^nd March, 2017 respondents No.2 to 5 i.e. son, wife and two daughters of late Kashi Nath Pandey were present and statements of respondents No.3 to 5 were recorded that they did not wish to proceed with the above-noted FIR and the proceedings pursuant thereto as the petitioner was their family friend. However, since respondent No.6 was not present nor she was represented through a power of attorney, matter was adjourned for today. A special power of attorney has been executed by respondent No.6 in favour of respondent No.2.

¶15

Respondent No. 2 is present in Court and is identified by the Investigating Officer. Respondent No.2 states that he is the special power of attorney holder of respondent No.6 and competent to make the statement on her behalf. Respondent No.2 on his behalf and on behalf of respondent No.6 his grand-mother states that they do not wish to pursue the above-noted FIR and the proceedings pursuant thereto against the petitioner.

¶16

Petitioner who is present in Court and is identified by the learned counsel affirms the statements of respondent No.3 to 5 as recorded on 22^nd March, 2017 and of respondent No.2 on his behalf and on behalf of respondent No.6 recorded today.

¶17

Considering the fact that the parties have settled the matter and no useful purpose would be served in continuing with the above-noted FIR and the proceedings pursuant thereto, it would be in the interest of justice to quash the FIR in question. There is no legal impediment in quashing the FIR in question.

¶18

CRL.M.C. 1791/2016

¶19

page 2 of 3

¶20

Consequently, FIR No. 178/2013 under Sections 304A IPC registered at PS Ashok Vihar, Delhi and proceedings pursuant thereto are hereby quashed.

¶21

Respondent No.3, 4 & 5 have already signed the order sheet in acknowledgement of their statements made on 22^nd March, 2017. The petitioner, respondent No.2 on his behalf and on behalf of respondent No.6 have signed the order sheet in acknowledgment of their statements made before this Court today.

¶22

Petition is disposed of. Order dasti.

¶23

MUKTA GUPTA, J.

¶24

MAY 05, 2017 ‘ga’

¶25

page 3 of 3

¶26

CRL.M.C. 1791/2016

Suraj v. the State ( Govt of NCT of Delhi) & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suraj v. the State ( Govt of NCT of Delhi) & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mohd. Ilyas Vs State & Anr.

Manas Ranjan Jain Vs State

Asha Jain Vs Kaushilya Saraf

Kapil Gupta Vs State

Vipin Rai & Anr. Vs State (Nct of Delhi) & Anr.

Dharmender Paswan Vs the State NCT of Delhi