Allowed

Gagan Kharbanda v. the State of Delhi & Ors.

Delhi HC15 Feb 2019CRL.M.C./870/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allowed a writ petition under Section 482 CrPC to quash an FIR and consequential proceedings. The court relied on a compromise, the petitioner's age, lack of antecedents, and an apology. Quashing is conditional on depositing Rs.5,000 in three funds within two weeks.

What did the court decide?

Quashed FIR No. 175/2017 and consequent proceedings subject to deposit of Rs. 15,000 in public funds within two weeks.

Gagan Kharbanda Vs the State of Delhi & Ors. — Quashing and FIR | Delhi HC (2019)

¶1

$~33

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- CRL.M.C. 870/2019 & CRL.M.A.3477/2019

¶4

GAGAN KHARBANDA ..... Petitioner

¶5

Through:	Mr. R.S. Juneja and Mr.
	Yogesh Kumar Rana, Advs.
	with the petitioner in person

¶6

versus

¶7

THE STATE OF DELHI & O	RS .... Respondents
Through:	Mr.Ashish Dutta, APP with
	ASI Chander Pal Singh, PS
	Farsh Bazar, Delhi
	Mr. Pankaj Kumar, Adv. for
	R-2 with R-2 in person

¶8

CORAM:
HON'BLE MR.	JUSTICE CHANDER SHEKHAR
	O R D E R
%	15.02.2019

¶9

CRL.M.A. 3477/2019 (for exemption)

¶10

Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. Application stands disposed of.

¶11

CRL.M.C. 870/2019

¶12

The petitioner has filed the present petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for quashing of FIR No.175/2017 dated 1.5.2017 under Sections 451/354-B/506/509/323 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC), registered at Police Station Farsh Bazar, New Delhi and the proceedings emanating therefrom.

¶13

The petitioner and respondent No.2 as well as the learned

¶14

counsel for the parties submitted that the parties have entered into a settlement vide Compromise Deed dated 12.2.2019 on their own free will without any force, pressure or coercion.

¶15

The Investigating Officer (‘IO’), who is present in Court, has identified the petitioner as well as respondent No.2 and has also verified the settlement arrived at between the parties. The IO further stated that the petitioner has no other criminal antecedent.

¶16

The respondent No.2, present in the Court, submitted that the petitioner has already shifted his residence from her neighbourhood and also tendered unconditional apology to her and she has now forgiven him. Respondent No.2 further submitted that in terms of the settlement arrived at between the parties, she has no objection to the petition being allowed and the quashing of the FIR.

¶17

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that taking into consideration the settlement arrived at between the parties and the young age and future of the petitioner, the petition may be allowed and the aforesaid FIR may be quashed.

¶18

In view of the aforesaid circumstances, the settlement arrived at between the parties as well as the age and socio-economic condition of the petitioner, I deem it appropriate to give the petitioner a chance to reform and reintegrate into the society as a productive member. In the interest of justice, the FIR No. 175/2017 dated 1.5.2017 under Sections 451/354-B/506/509/323 of the IPC, registered at Police Station Farsh Bazar, New Delhi and all the consequential proceedings arising out of the FIR are quashed subject to the petitioner depositing

¶19

within two weeks, a sum of Rs.5,000/- in the Prime Minister's National Relief Fund, Rs.5,000/- in the Delhi High Court Advocates’ Welfare Trust and Rs.5,000/- in the Delhi Police Martyrs’ Fund, Account No.18200110036907, UCO Bank, IFSC Code:UCBA0001820 and the receipts of the said deposits shall be filed in the Registry within three weeks. Copy of the receipts shall also be handed over to the APP through the I.O. within three weeks. In case the petitioner fails to deposit the said sum, the prosecution shall be entitled to move an application for passing appropriate orders.

¶20

Petition is disposed of in above terms.

¶21

FEBRUARY 15, 2019/rk

¶22

CHANDER SHEKHAR, J

Gagan Kharbanda v. the State of Delhi & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gagan Kharbanda v. the State of Delhi & Ors.

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

Rajesh Tripathi Vs State (Nct of Delhi) & Anr.

Ritesh Jindal & Anr. Vs Kanta Devi

Manoj Kumar & Ors. Vs State & Anr.

Tapan & Ors. Vs State & Ors.

Sh. Dinesh Vs State

Sudesh Sharma & Ors. Vs State & Anr.