Quashed

Rohit @ Rohit Bhuttan & Anr. v. the State Govt of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Delhi HC11 Apr 2018W.P.(CRL)/3262/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Delhi quashed an FIR under various IPC sections and subsequent proceedings, relying on an undisputed settlement between the petitioners and victims who returned mortgaged gold jewelry and received an apology.

What did the court decide?

FIR No. 103/2017 and proceedings pursuant thereto quashed pending deposit of ₹10,000/- each with the Juvenile Justice Fund.

Rohit @ Rohit Bhuttan & Anr. Vs the State Govt of NCT of… — Quashing and FIR | Delhi HC (2018)

¶1

$~29

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

W.P.(CRL) 3262/2017 & Crl.M.A.19171/2017 (interim relief) ROHIT @ ROHIT BHUTTAN & ANR ... Petitioners Represented by: Mr.Mroof Ahmad, Advocate with petitioners in person versus

¶4

THE STATE GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR .... Respondents Represented by: Ms.Srilina Roy, proxy counsel for Ms.Nandita Rao, ASC for the State with SI Thakur Singh, PS Chandni Mahal Mr.Gaffar Hussain, Advocate for respondents No.2 & 3 with respondents No.2 & 3 in person

¶5

CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA

¶6

O R D E R % 11.04.2018

¶7

By this petition the petitioners seek quashing of FIR No.103/2017 under Sections 420/406/506/120-B and Section 354-A IPC registered at PS Chandni Mahal, 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 proxy counsel for learned Additional Standing Counsel for the State on instructions from Investigating Officer submits that in the above-noted FIR two petitioners are the accused and respondent No.2 and 3 the victims.

¶9

W.P.(CRL) 3262/2017

¶10

Page 1 of 3

¶11

Respondent No. 2 and 3 are present in Court and are identified by learned counsel and the Investigating Officer. They state that they have settled the matter with the petitioners vide Compromise Deed dated 13^th November, 2017 and in terms of the settlement, entire gold jewellery mortgaged by the respondent No.2 with the petitioners has been returned to her. Further, the petitioners have also apologized for their acts and thus, they do not wish to pursue the above-noted FIR and the proceedings pursuant thereto.

¶12

Petitioners who are present in Court and are identified by the learned counsel affirm the statement of respondents No.2 and 3 and undertake to abide by the terms of the Compromise Deed dated 13^th November, 2017. They have also apologized to respondents No.2 and 3 and assure that in future no such misbehaviour will take place. To show remorse they undertake to deposit a sum of ₹10,000/- each with the Juvenile Justice Fund within four weeks.

¶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. 103/2017 under Sections 420/406/506/120-B and Section 354-A IPC registered at PS Chandni Mahal, Delhi and proceedings pursuant thereto are hereby quashed subject to the petitioners abiding by their undertaking of depositing a sum of ₹10,000/- each with the W.P.(CRL) 3262/2017 Page 2 of 3

¶15

Juvenile Justice Fund, maintained by Registrar General of this Court, within four weeks.

¶16

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

¶17

Petition and the application is disposed of. Order dasti.

MUKTA GUPTA, J.

APRIL 11, 2018

‘rk’

W.P.(CRL) 3262/2017

¶22

Page 3 of 3

Rohit @ Rohit Bhuttan & Anr. v. the State Govt of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rohit @ Rohit Bhuttan & Anr. 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Gaurav Sharma & Ors. Vs the State (Gnct of Delhi)& Anr.

Ravinder Singh Vs State

Savita Jain Vs State

Gopal Ananadani Vs the State & Ors.

Piyush Chopra Vs the State & Anr.

Rohit Chopra & Ors. Vs the Stae & Anr.

Ahmed Shoukeen Vs State

Dhanwanti Vs the State Govt of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Samay Pal Vs the State ( Govt. of NCT of Delhi)

Rohit Singh @ Fauzi Vs the State Govt of NCT of Delhi

Gaurav Sharma & Ors. Vs the State (Gnct of Delhi)& Anr.

Kailash Shankar & Ors. Vs the State Govt of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Aarti Nishad @ Aarti Balkrishana & Anr. Vs the State Govt of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Babloo Tiwari Vs the State Govt of NCT of Delhi