Quashed

Neeraj Chitkara v. State of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Delhi HC25 Sept 2024W.P.(CRL)/1233/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court quashed FIR No. 0486/2022 under Sections 285/336 IPC regarding a fire incident. The directed quashing was conditional upon the petitioner depositing Rs.10,000 with the Delhi State Legal Services Authority for victim support within four weeks, finalized through a settlement agreement.

What did the court decide?

Quashing of FIR No. 0486/2022 and consequent proceedings, subject to deposit of Rs.10,000 with Delhi State Legal Services Authority within four weeks.

Neeraj Chitkara Vs State of NCT of Delhi & Anr. — Quashing and FIR | Delhi HC (2024)

¶1

$~14

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- W.P.(CRL) 1233/2023

¶4

NEERAJ CHITKARA .....Petitioner Through: Mr. A.K. Tripathi and Mr. Abhishek Rawat, Advocates with petitioner in person.

¶5

versus

¶6

STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Anand V Khatri, ASC for State alongwith SI Pradeep Kr., P.S. Rajouri Garden. Mr. Arpit Batra, Advocate for respondent No.2 with respondent No.2 in person.

¶7

CORAM:

¶8

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR OHRI O R D E R % 25.09.2024

¶9

The present proceedings are instituted under Article 226 of the Constitution of India on behalf of the petitioners seeking quashing of FIR No. 0486/2022 registered under Sections 285/336 IPC at P.S. Rajouri Garden, Delhi on the ground that the parties have amicably settled their disputes.

¶10

As per the allegations levelled in the FIR, a fire incident occurred at the shop owned by the respondent No.2, however no name was mentioned in the FIR. The petitioner owns the adjoining shop where some construction was being carried out by his tenant.

¶11

Learned ASC for the State, on instructions, submits that the petitioner

¶12

This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 04/07/2025 at 03:21:53

¶13

is the only accused person and respondent No.2 is the complainant/victim in the present case. He, on instructions, submits that no case is found to be made out and, in fact, a closure report has been filed in the concerned Court which is pending consideration.

¶14

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner and respondent No. 2 have amicably settled their disputes vide MOU dated 18.08.2022, a copy of which has been placed on record.

¶15

The petitioner and respondent No.2, who are present in Court, have been identified by their respective counsel as well as the I.O./SI Pradeep Kr., P.S. Rajouri Garden. Petitioner volunteers to deposit a sum of Rs.10,000/with the DSLSA as his contribution towards the benefit of society.

¶16

Respondent No. 2 states that she has entered into the settlement with the petitioner out of her own free will, volition and without any coercion. She further states that she has no objection if the present FIR and consequent proceedings are quashed.

¶17

The parties shall remain bound by the statements made in Court today.

¶18

In view of the above facts and considering that no useful purpose will be served in continuance of the proceedings, it is directed that the aforesaid FIR and the consequent proceedings arising therefrom are hereby quashed, subject to payment of Rs.10,000/-, as volunteered by the petitioner, with the Delhi State Legal Services Authority (A/c No. 18580110053263, UCO Bank, Branch : Rouse Avenue, IFSC : UCBA0003364) within a period of four weeks from today. The amount so deposited shall be utilized by the DSLSA for providing counselling/psychological support to POCSO victims requiring such assistance.

¶19

¶20

Proof evidencing receipt of deposit shall be filed with the I.O. as well as in Court failing which, the I.O. shall be at liberty to move appropriate application.

¶21

A copy of this order be communicated to the Member Secretary, Delhi State Legal Services Authority for intimation.

¶22

With the above directions, the petition is disposed of.

¶23

MANOJ KUMAR OHRI, J

¶24

SEPTEMBER 25, 2024 ga

¶25

Neeraj Chitkara v. State of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Neeraj Chitkara v. State 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

Gopal Singh Hanot Vs State of Delhi through Its SHO P.S. Nizamuddin, New Delhi & Ors.

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

M/S Universal Cylinders Ltd. & Anr. Vs State (Nct of Delhi) & Anr.

Satish Rajora Vs State of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Usha Rani Vs State NCT of Delhi

Geeta Gandhi Vs Central Bureau of Investigation & Anr.

Smt. Neelam Gupta Vs State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) and Ors.

Manisha Nimesh Mehta & Anr. Vs State Govt of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Raj Kumar Hingorani & Anr. Vs the State of Govt of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Sanjay Kumar Gaur & Anr. Vs State Gnct of Delhi & Ors.

Manoj Kumar Vs State & Anr.

M/S Raaj Unocal Lubricants Ltd. Vs State & Anr.

Mahesh Kumar Yadav Vs Union of India