Quashed

Mushtaq Ahmed v. the State Govt of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Delhi HC6 Dec 2018W.P.(CRL)/474/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order quashes FIR No.63/2017 under Sections 354/342 IPC and related proceedings on the ground that the petitioner and complainant settled the matter amicably. The petitioner undertook to deposit costs and show remorse.

What did the court decide?

Quashing of FIR No.63/2017 under Sections 354/342 IPC and proceedings pursuant thereto subject to deposit of ₹5,000 with the Delhi High Court Staff Welfare Fund within four weeks.

Mushtaq Ahmed Vs the State Govt of NCT of Delhi & Anr. — Quashing and FIR | Delhi HC (2018)

¶1

$~28

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

W.P.(CRL) 474/2018 MUSHTAQ AHMED ..... Petitioner Represented by: Mr.Abdul Salam, Advocate

¶4

versus

¶5

THE STATE GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR ..... Respondents Represented by: Mr.Rajesh Mahajan, ASC for the State with SI Ashish, PS Bhajanpura R-2 in person

¶6

CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA

¶7

O R D E R

¶8

% 06.12.2018

¶9

Though no steps have been taken for service of respondent No.2 however respondent No.2 is present in Court.

¶10

By this petition, the petitioner seeks quashing of FIR No.63/2017 under Sections 354/342 IPC registered at PS Bhajan Pura, Delhi on the complaint of respondent No.2 and the proceedings pursuant thereto on the ground that the parties have settled the matter.

¶11

Learned Additional Standing Counsel for the State on instructions submits that in the above noted FIR petitioner is the only accused and the respondent No.2 is the only complainant/victim.

¶12

Respondent No.2 who is present in Court and is identified by the Investigating Officer states that she has settled the matter with the petitioner vide settlement deed dated 22^nd January, 2018, copy whereof is

¶13

W.P.(CRL) 474/2018 page 1 of 2

¶14

annexed at pages 25 to 27 of the paper book. She states that in terms of the settlement she does not want to pursue the abovementioned FIR and the proceedings pursuant thereto.

¶15

Petitioner who is present in Court and is identified by the learned counsel affirms the statement of respondent No.2 and undertakes to abide by the terms of settlement and to show remorse undertakes to deposit cost.

¶16

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.

¶17

Consequently, FIR No.63/2017 under Sections 354/342 IPC registered at PS Bhajan Pura, Delhi and proceedings pursuant thereto are hereby quashed subject to petitioner depositing a sum of ₹5,000/- with the Delhi High Court Staff Welfare Fund within four weeks.

¶18

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

¶19

Petition is disposed of. Order dasti.

¶20

MUKTA GUPTA, J.

¶21

DECEMBER 06, 2018 mamta

¶22

page 2 of 2

¶23

W.P.(CRL) 474/2018

Mushtaq Ahmed v. the State Govt of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mushtaq Ahmed 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

Prem Shankar Sharma & Ors. Vs State (Govt of NCT Delhi) & Anr.

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

Kamlesh Kumar Vs State

Lomas Rishi Gupta & Ors. Vs Ms. Tanupriya Gupta & Anr.

Vinay Kumar Vs the State Govt of NCT of Delhi

Ankit Jain Vs State of Delhi & Anr.

Subhjit Banarjee & Ors. Vs State (Govt of NCT of Delhi) & Anr.

Neeraj Sharma Vs State(Govt. of NCT of Delhi)

Nikhil Suri Vs State ( Govt of NCT of Delhi)

Kamlesh Kumar Vs State

Habibur Rehman Vs State ( NCT of Delhi)

Smt Krishna & Ors. Vs Commissioner of Police & Ors.

Rajkumar Vs State (Nct of Delhi)