Petitioners sought quashing of an FIR and proceedings alleging sexual outrage on settled complaints. Court observed settlement after mediation and no useful purpose in continuance, quashing the FIR and proceedings u/s 354A/323/325 IPC.
FIR No. 120/2013 u/s 354A/323/325 IPC and proceedings pursuant thereto are 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.
$~15
| Represented by: versus |
..... Petitioner Mr. Surjit Singh Malhotra, Mr. Rohit Mehtra, Mr. Amit Bhalla, Advs. |
|
|---|---|---|
| STATE & ORS. | ..... Respondent | |
| Represented by: | Mr. Hirein Sharma, APP. | |
| Mr. Pradeep Kr. Mishra, Adv. for R-2&3. |
CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA
O R D E R % 16.01.2017
By the present petition the petitioners seek quashing of FIR No. 120/2013 under Sections 354A/323/325 IPC registered at PS Moti Nagar, Delhi on the complaint of Respondent No.2 and the proceedings pursuant thereto on the ground that the parties have settled the matter.
Learned APP for the State on instructions from Investigating Officer submits that in the above-noted FIR the five petitioners are the only accused, respondent No.2 the complainant/ victim and respondent No.3 the other victim.
Respondent No. 2 & 3 are present in Court and are identified by the learned counsel. They state that they have settled the matter with the CRL.M.C. 1805/2016 page 1 of 2
petitioners before the mediation centre, CAW Cell, Govt. of NCT Delhi on 5th May, 2014 and in view thereof they do not wish to pursue the abovenoted FIR and the proceedings pursuant thereto.
The petitioners who are present in Court and are identified by the counsel affirm the statement of respondent No.2 and 3 and state that they will abide by the terms of settlement arrived at between the parties.
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. 120/2013 under Sections 354A/323/325 IPC registered at PS Moti Nagar, Delhi and proceedings pursuant thereto are hereby quashed.
Parties have signed this order sheet in acknowledgment of their statements made before this Court.
The petition is disposed of. Order dasti.
MUKTA GUPTA, J.
JANUARY 16, 2017 ‘ga’
page 2 of 2
CRL.M.C. 1805/2016
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the FIR u/s 354A/323/325 IPC can be quashed upon settlement between parties.
Whether settlement arrived at through mediation justifies quashing of criminal proceedings.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Punit Anand & Ors.
State
Respondent No. 2
Respondent No. 3
Mukta Gupta
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
