Allowed

Umang Sharma & Ors. v. State & Anr.

Delhi HC1 Feb 2018CRL.M.C./524/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Single Judge of the Delhi High Court allowed a petition to quash an FIR under Sections 308, 379, 341, and 34 IPC. The Court noted the incident was a road accident resulting in a settled dispute via a compromise deed. Finding that continued proceedings serve no purpose, the FIR was quashed and consequent proceedings were stopped.

What did the court decide?

FIR No. 270/2013 and consequent proceedings under Sections 308/379/341/34 IPC were quashed; petitioner ordered to deposit Rs. 10,000 with Delhi Child Welfare Fund.

Umang Sharma & Ors. Vs State & Anr. — Cheque Dishonour | Delhi HC (2018)

¶1

$~47

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

CRL.M.C. 524/2018 UMANG SHARMA & ORS ..... Petitioners

¶4

Through : Mr Mohit Singh, Advocate.

¶5

versus STATE & ANR ..... Respondents Through : Mr Mukesh Kumar, Addl. PP for the State. ASI Jitendra Kumar, PS New Ashok Nagar. Mr Rakesh Kumar, Advocate for R-2.

¶6

CORAM:

¶7

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA O R D E R % 01.02.2018 Crl. M.A. 1916/2018(exemption)

¶8

Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

¶9

CRL.M.C. 524/2018

¶10

The petitioner seeks quashing of FIR No.270/2013, under Sections 308/379/341/34 IPC, Police Station New Ashok Nagar, on the basis of a compromise.

¶11

As per the FIR, the subject incident is alleged to have happened on account of a minor road accident.

¶12

Parties have settled their dispute and Compromise Deed dated 30.10.2017 has been executed.

¶13

Respondent No.2 is present in person and is represented by his counsel and is identified by the Investigating Officer. He confirms that the parties have settled their dispute with the intervention of the members of family and other members of their locality as they are stated to be residing in the same locality.

¶14

In view of the above and keeping in view of the fact that the parties have settled their dispute through a Compromise Deed dated 30.10.2017 and respondent No. 2 does not wish to press his 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.

¶15

In view of the above, the subject FIR No.270 /2013, under Sections 308/379/341/34 IPC, Police Station New Ashok Nagar as well as the consequent proceedings arising therefrom are quashed, the petitioners shall deposit cost of Rs.10,000/- with the “Delhi Child Welfare Fund”, Department of Women and Child Development, 1A, Canning Lane, Kasturba Gandhi Marg, New Delhi , within a period of two weeks from today. Receipt of deposit of the costs imposed by this Order be furnished to the concerned Investigating Officer within a period of three weeks from today.

¶16

Order Dasti under signatures of the Court Master.

¶17

SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J

¶18

FEBRUARY 01, 2018/ ‘Sn’

Umang Sharma & Ors. v. State & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Umang Sharma & Ors. v. State & 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

Neeraj Vs the State Govt of NCT of Delhi

Raghunath & Ors. Vs the State (Nct of Delhi) & Anr.

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

Madhulika S Rastogi Vs State (Govt of NCT New Delhi)

Sonu Vs State(Nct of Delhi) & Ors.

Sanjay Kumar Jutshi@Bunti Vs the State (Nct of Delhi)