Allowed

Hans Raj v. the State and Anr.

Delhi HC12 Mar 2018CRL.M.C./1244/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Delhi quashed FIR No.61/2016 and consequent proceedings under Sections 354A/509 IPC. The court held that continued proceedings would be futile due to settlement and lack of prosecution intent, directing the petitioner to deposit Rs. 10,000 into the Prisoners Welfare Fund.

What did the court decide?

FIR No.61/2016 and consequent proceedings quashed; petitioner directed to deposit Rs. 10,000 with Prisoners Welfare Fund within three weeks.

Hans Raj Vs the State and Anr. — Quashing and FIR | Delhi HC (2018)

¶1

$~56

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- CRL.M.C. 1244/2018

¶4

HANS RAJ ..... Petitioner

¶5

Through: Mr. M.P. Sinha, Advocate.

versus

THE STATE AND ANR

..... Respondents

Through : Mr Mukesh Kumar, APP. SI Lala Ram, PS Lodhi Colony. Ms. Babita, complainant in person.

¶10

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA O R D E R % 12.03.2018 Crl.M.A.4561/ 2018(exemption)

¶11

Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

¶12

CRL.M.C. 1244/2018

¶13

By this petition, the petitioner seeks quashing of FIR No.61/2016 under Sections 354A/509 IPC, Police Station Lodhi Colony, based on a settlement.

¶14

Respondent No.2 is present in Court in person, is represented by counsel and identified by the Investigating Officer. She submits that she does not wish to prosecute the complaint any further.

¶15

In view of the fact that the parties have settled their disputes

¶16

CRL.M.C.1244/2018

¶17

Page 1

¶18

and respondent No. 2 does not wish to prosecute the complaint, continuation of criminal proceedings will be an exercise in futility and justice in the case demands that the dispute between the parties is put to an end and peace is restored; securing the ends of justice being the ultimate guiding factor. It would be expedient to quash the subject FIR and the consequent proceedings emanating therefrom.

¶19

Accordingly, the subject FIR No.61/2016 under Sections 354A/509 IPC, Police Station Lodhi Colony, as well as the consequent proceedings arising therefrom are quashed, subject to the petitioner depositing costs of Rs. 10,000/- with the “Prisoners Welfare Fund, Jail No. 13, Mandoli” , Mangal Pandey Marg, Harsh Vihar, Village Mandoli, Delhi, within a period of three weeks from today. Receipt of deposit of the costs imposed by this Order be furnished to the concerned Investigating Officer within a period of four weeks from today.

¶20

5. Order Dasti under signatures of the Court Master.

¶21

SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J

¶22

MARCH 12, 2018 ‘Sn’

¶23

CRL.M.C.1244/2018

¶24

Page 2

Hans Raj v. the State and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hans Raj v. the State and 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

Rajendari Devi & Anr. Vs Pramod Kumar Basotia

Suman Tiwari & Anr. Vs Arun Kumar Aggarwal

Icici Bank Ltd. Vs Yogesh Grover

Vishal Gupta Vs Mohan Lal & Anr.

Canara Bank Vs the Delhi Karnataka Sangha

The Delhi Karnataka Sangh Vs Canara Bank