High Court of Delhi quashed FIR No. 356/2017 and consequent proceedings under Sections 365, 386, 506, and 34 IPC upon voluntary settlement between petitioners and respondent no. 2.
FIR No. 356/2017 and consequent proceedings under Sections 365/386/506/34 IPC 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.
$~58
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
AMIT @ TOTO & ANOTHER ..... Petitioners Through Mr. Sachin Aggarwal, Adv. with Mr. Karambir Singh, Parokar
Versus
STATE & ANOTHER ..... Respondents Through Ms. Aashaa Tiwari, APP Mr. Vijay Shankar Tiwari and Mr. Ashwani Kumar, Advs. with respondent no. 2
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. PATHAK
O R D E R % 09.07.2018
Notice. Learned APP accepts notice for respondent no. 1.
Respondent no.2 Mr. Sunder Singh is present in Court along with his counsel and accepts notice.
It is submitted that petitioners and respondent no. 2 were known to each other. A quarrel took place between them on some trivial issue, which led to registration of the FIR No. 356/2017 under Sections 365/386/506/34 IPC at Police Station Mundka. They have settled their disputes amicably, vide a Settlement Deed dated 8th June, 2018. Therefore, aforesaid FIR and
the consequent proceedings emanating therefrom may be quashed. Respondent no. 2 says that he has settled the matter with the petitioners of his own free will and without any undue force, pressure or coercion. Respondent no. 2 further says that he has no objection in case FIR is quashed against all the petitioners. Affidavit of respondent no. 2 to this effect is also on record at pages 17-18.
Keeping in mind the settlement arrived at between the petitioners and respondent no. 2 voluntarily, in my view, no fruitful purpose would be served to keep the criminal proceedings pending. Accordingly, in the interest of justice, aforesaid FIR and the consequent proceedings emanating therefrom are quashed.
Petition is disposed of in the above terms. Miscellaneous application is disposed of as infructuous. Dasti.
A.K. PATHAK, J.
JULY 09, 2018 r.bararia
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the FIR under Sections 365/386/506/34 IPC and consequent proceedings should be quashed upon settlement.
Whether a settlement arrived at between petitioners and accused without coercion serves the interest of justice.
Amit @ Toto & Another
State
Sunder Singh
A.K. Pathak
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
