Allowed

Deepak & Ors. v. the State Govt of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Delhi HC4 Jan 2018W.P.(CRL)/18/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Delhi quashed an FIR under Section 324 IPC after the parties resolved their dispute via a Memorandum of Understanding. The court held that continuing proceedings would be futile. Petitioners were required to deposit ₹10,000 with the PM's National Relief Fund before quashing.

What did the court decide?

FIR No.658/2018 and proceedings qua petitioners quashed upon deposit of ₹10,000 with PM's National Relief Fund.

Deepak & Ors. Vs the State Govt of NCT of Delhi & Anr. — Cheque Dishonour | Delhi HC (2018)

¶1

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶2

Date of Order: January 10, 2019

¶3

+ CRL.M.C. 65/2019 & Crl.M.A. 335/2019

¶4

MR. DEEPAK & ANR. ..... Petitioners Through: Mr. Hitesh Chopra & Mr. Ashok, Advocates

¶5

Versus

¶6

STATE & ANR.

¶7

..... Respondent Through: Mr. Izhar Ahmed, Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent-State with SI Manoj Chauhan Mr. Pradeep Kumar Pathak, Advocate with respondent No.2 in person

¶8

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR

¶9

O R D E R (ORAL)

¶10

Quashing of FIR No.658/2018, under Section 324 IPC, registered at police station Paschim Vihar, Delhi is sought on the basis of Memorandum of Understanding of 8^th December, 2018 reached between the parties.

¶11

Upon notice, Mr. Izhar Ahmed, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent No.1-State and Mr. Pradeep Kumar Pathak, Advocate for respondent No.2, accept notice. Respondent No.2 present in the Court has been duly identified by his counsel as the complainant/firstinformant of the FIR in question.

¶12

Crl.M.C. 65/2019

¶13

Page 1 of 3

¶14

Respondent No.2, present in the Court, submits that the dispute between the parties has been amicably resolved vide Memorandum of Understanding of 8^th December, 2018 and terms thereof, have been fully acted upon. He affirms the contents of Memorandum of Understanding of 8^th December, 2018 and of his affidavit of 24^th December, 2018 filed in support of this petition and submits that now no dispute with petitioners survives and so, the proceedings arising out of the FIR in question be brought to an end.

¶15

In ‘Gian Singh Vs State of Punjab’ (2012) 10 SCC 303, Supreme Court has recognized the need of amicable resolution of disputes in cases like the instant one, by observing as under:-

¶16

“Resolution of a dispute by way of a compromise between two warring groups, therefore, should attract the immediate and prompt attention of a court which should endeavour to give full effect to the same unless such compromise is abhorrent to lawful composition of the society or would promote savagery.

¶17

Where the High Court quashes a criminal proceeding having regard to the fact that the dispute between the offender and the victim has been settled although the offences are not compoundable, it does so as in its opinion, 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.”

¶18

In the facts and circumstances of this case and in view of aforesaid Memorandum of Understanding of 8^th December, 2018, I find that continuance of proceedings arising out of the FIR in question would be an exercise in futility, as the misunderstanding, which led to registration of

¶19

Crl.M.C. 65/2019

¶20

Page 2 of 3

¶21

the FIR, now stands cleared between the parties.

¶22

Accordingly, this petition is allowed subject to cost of ` 10,000/- to be deposited by petitioners with Prime Minister’s National Relief Fund within four weeks from today and upon placing on record the receipt of deposit of cost with two weeks thereafter, FIR No.658/2018, under Section 324 IPC, registered at police station Paschim Vihar, Delhi and the proceedings emanating therefrom shall stand quashed qua petitioners. This petition and application are accordingly disposed of.

¶23

(SUNIL GAUR) JUDGE

¶24

JANUARY 10, 2019 r

¶25

Crl.M.C. 65/2019

¶26

Page 3 of 3

Deepak & Ors. v. the State Govt of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Deepak & Ors. 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

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Babita Devi Vs State of Haryana & Ors.

Mohd Anis Vs State (Govt of NCT Delhi) & Anr.

Shyam Lall @ Samuel Lall Vs S D M & Ors.

Satish Chand Vs the State Govt of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Kamal Tyagi Vs State of NCT of Delhi

Sunita & Anr. Vs State of Delhi & Anr.

Om Prakash Chautala Vs the State Govt of NCT of Delhi

Sonu Vs the State Govt of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Arise India Ltd. Vs Raj Electronics & Electricals

Sunder Vs State ( Govt of NCT of Delhi)

Abdul Vs the State (Nct of Delhi)

Mr Balkaran Bhullar Vs CBI

Sahil Gupta Vs State (Nct of Delhi) & Anr.

Kaptan Singh & Ors. Vs the State Gnct of Delhi & Anr.