Rubesh Gupta v. the State & Anr.
Case brief
What is this about?
Petitioner sought quashment of an FIR based on settlement. Court noted parties executed an MOU. FIR and proceedings quashed. Laptop for separate investigation ordered to be transferred.
What did the court decide?
FIR No. 491/2017 under Sections 380/411 IPC and related proceedings quashed; laptop to be transferred for investigation in FIR No. 689/2017.
What the court decided
$~1
- IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(CRL) 683/2018 RUBESH GUPTA ..... Petitioner Represented by: Mr.Pankaj K. Sharma, Adv. with petitioner in person versus THE STATE & ANR ..... Respondents Represented by: Mr.Rajesh Mahajan, ASC for STaate with Ms.Jyoti Babbar, Adv. SI Yashpal and HC Ramesh Kumar, PS Kalkaji. Respondent No.2 in person
CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA
O R D E R
% 06.04.2018
By this petition, the petitioner seeks quashing of an FIR No.491/2017 under Sections 380/411 IPC registered at PS Kalkaji on the complaint of respondent No.2 and the proceedings pursuant thereto on the ground that the parties have settled their matter.
Learned ASC for State, on instructions from the Investigating Officer submits that in the above noted FIR the petitioner is only accused and the respondent No.2 is the only complainant/ victim.
Learned ASC for the State further submits that the laptop recovered during the course of the present investigation is required in FIR No.689/2017 under Section 380 IPC, registered at PS Faridabad, Sector-31, Haryana and be permitted to be transferred in the said investigation.
Respondent No.2 is present in the Court and is identified by the
Issues for consideration
1 issue framed by the court
Whether an FIR under Sections 380/411 IPC can be quashed when parties have settled the matter via an MOU.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Rubesh Gupta
- respondent
The State & Anr
Coram
Mukta Gupta
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court