Quashed

Arvind Kumar & Anr. v. State & Anr.

Delhi HC8 May 2017CRL.M.C./714/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Delhi quashed FIR No. 387/2012 and associated proceedings under Sections 448, 380, 308, and 34 IPC. The court held that since the parties had amicably settled the matter and the complainant wished to drop the case, continuing the proceedings served no useful purpose. Petitioners were directed to deposit ₹25,000 each with the Juvenile Justice Fund.

What did the court decide?

Quashing of FIR No. 387/2012 and proceedings pursuant thereto; release of seized money and goods to the complainant subject to deposit of ₹25,000 by each petitioner.

Arvind Kumar & Anr. Vs State & Anr. — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Delhi HC (2017)

¶1

$~22

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- CRL.M.C. 714/2017 & Crl.M.A. 3023/2017 (stay) ARVIND KUMAR & ANR.

¶4

..... Petitioner Represented by: Mr. M. Shamikh, Adv.

¶5

versus STATE & ANR. ..... Respondent Represented by: Mr. Ashok Kr. Garg, APP with SI Ashwani, PS Pandav Nagar. R-2 in person. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA

¶6

O R D E R % 08.05.2017

¶7

By the present petition the petitioners seek quashing of FIR No. 387/2012 under Sections 448/380/308/34 IPC registered at PS Pandav Nagar, Delhi on the complaint of Respondent No.2 and the proceedings pursuant thereto on the ground that the parties have settled the matter.

¶8

Learned APP for the State on instructions from Investigating Officer submits that in the above-noted FIR the two petitioners are the only accused and respondent No.2 the only complainant. He states that when information of the incident was received by the Police and it reached the spot the petitioners also misbehaved with the Police officers for which a separate FIR has been registered, which is not the subject matter of the present petition. He further states that in the above-noted FIR the respondent No.2 is the only victim.

¶9

CRL.M.C. 714/2017

¶10

page 1 of 3

¶11

Respondent No. 2 is present in Court and is identified by the Investigating Officer. He states that he has settled the matter with the petitioners and does not wish to pursue the above-noted FIR and the proceedings pursuant thereto. He states that pursuant to the registration of FIR recoveries were made from the petitioners which included the cash amount and other articles of the respondent No.2 duly seized vide seizure memos dated 12^th September, 2012 and 13^th September, 2012 which are lying with the Police. The same be released to him.

¶12

The petitioners who are present in Court and are identified by the learned counsel affirm the statement of respondent No.2. While tendering their unqualified apology they assure that no such misbehaviour will take place in future. To show remorse they undertake to pay cost. They further state that they have no objection if the money and goods seized vide seizure memos dated 12^th and 13^th September, 2012 are released to the respondent No.2.

¶13

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, 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.

¶14

Consequently, FIR No. 387/2012 under Sections 448/380/308/34 IPC registered at PS Pandav Nagar, Delhi and proceedings pursuant thereto are hereby quashed subject to the petitioners depositing a cost of ₹25,000/- each with the Juvenile Justice Fund maintained by the Registrar General of this CRL.M.C. 714/2017 page 2 of 3

¶15

Court within four weeks. The investigating officer is directed to release to the respondent No.2/ complainant money and goods seized vide the two seizure memos dated 12^th and 13^th September, 2012.

¶16

Parties have signed this order sheet in acknowledgment of their statements made before this Court.

¶17

Petition and application are disposed of. Order dasti.

¶18

MUKTA GUPTA, J.

¶19

MAY 08, 2017 ‘ga’

¶20

page 3 of 3

¶21

CRL.M.C. 714/2017

Arvind Kumar & Anr. v. State & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arvind Kumar & Anr. v. State & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kapil Gupta Vs State

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

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

Isha Rashid Vs State

Manoj Kumar Vs the State & Ors.

Kamal Solanki Vs State of NCT of Delhi