Allowed

Manmohan Singh v. the State Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Delhi HC16 May 2024W.P.(CRL)/1543/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petition under Article 226 read with Section 482 Cr.P.C. sought quashing of FIR over a parking dispute after parties compromised by deed dated 26.04.2024; complainant and State raised no objection. Relying on Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, the High Court quashed the FIR.

What did the court decide?

FIR No. 42/2024 under Sections 323/341 IPC registered at P.S. Parliament Street, Delhi quashed; pending applications disposed of.

Manmohan Singh Vs the State Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Anr. — Quashing and FIR | Delhi HC (2024)

¶1

$~70

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- W.P.(CRL) 1543/2024

¶4

MANMOHAN SINGH ..... Petitioner

¶5

Through: Mr. Sagar Dhama, Mr. Ankit Choudhary & Mr. Chetan Nagar, Advocates alongwith petitioner in person.

¶6

versus

¶7

THE STATE GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI AND ANR.

¶8

..... Respondents Through: Mr. Sanjay Lao, Standing Counsel (Criminal) for the State with Ms. Priyam Aggarwal, Mr. Abhinav Kumar Arya & Mr. Shivesh Kaushik, Advocates. SI Anurag, P.S. Parliament Street. Respondent no. 2 in person (through vc).

¶9

CORAM:

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT SHARMA

¶11

% 16.05.2024 CRL.M.A. 15043/2024 (Exemption)

¶12

Exemption allowed, subject to just exceptions.

¶13

The application is accordingly disposed of.

¶14

W.P.(CRL) 1543/2024

¶15

The present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. seeks quashing of FIR No. 42/2024, under Sections 323/341 of the IPC, registered at P.S. Parliament Street, Delhi.

¶16

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 21/05/2024 at 11:51:13

¶17

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the present FIR was registered on account of dispute relating to parking. It is further submitted that during the pendency of the investigation of the present FIR, the parties have compromised their dispute vide Compromise deed dated 26.04.2024. In pursuance of which, respondent no. 2 has no objection if the present FIR is quashed.

¶18

Petitioner is present in Court today and complainant/respondent no. 2 appears through video conferencing and has been duly identified by the Investigating Officer, SI Anurag, P.S. Parliament Street.

¶19

The complainant/respondent no.2 states that the matter has been settled with the petitioner and he has no objection if the FIR is quashed. 7. Learned Standing Counsel for the State submits that investigation in the present FIR is pending and chargesheet is yet to be filed. In view of the settlement between the parties, learned Standing Counsel for the State also has no objection if the present FIR is quashed.

¶20

In Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, (2012) 10 SCC 303, the Hon‟ble Supreme Court has recognized the need of amicable resolution of disputes by observing as under:-

¶21

“61. ... In other words, the High Court must consider whether it would be unfair or contrary to the interest of justice to continue with the criminal proceedings or continuation of criminal proceedings would tantamount to abuse of process of law despite settlement and compromise between the victim and the wrongdoer and whether to secure the ends of justice, it is appropriate that criminal case is put to an end and if the answer to the above question(s) is in the affirmative, the High Court shall be well within its jurisdiction to quash the criminal proceeding.”

¶22

In view of the aforesaid circumstances, and the fact that the parties have put a quietus to the dispute, no useful purpose will be served in

¶23

This is a digitally signed order.

¶24

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 21/05/2024 at 11:51:13

¶25

continuing with the present FIR No. 42/2024, under Sections 323/341 of the IPC, registered at P.S. Parliament Street, Delhi.

¶26

In the interest of justice, the petition is allowed, and the FIR No. 42/2024, under Sections 323/341 of the IPC, registered at P.S. Parliament Street, Delhi, is hereby quashed.

¶27

Petition is allowed and disposed of accordingly.

¶28

Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.

¶29

AMIT SHARMA, J

¶30

MAY 16, 2024/bsr

¶31

Click here to check corrigendum, if any

¶32

This is a digitally signed order.

¶33

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 21/05/2024 at 11:51:13

Manmohan Singh v. the State Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manmohan Singh v. the State Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Veer Pratap Singh Vs State of NCT of Delhi & Anr. & Ors.

Manjeet Solanki Vs the State NCT of Delhi & Anr. & Ors.

Rahul Singhal Vs the State and Anr.

Vivek Sharma @ Billo Vs State NCT of Delhi

Anil Kumar Jain Vs State & Anr.

Emaar India Limited & Anr. Vs State NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Ajit Gogna Vs the Commissioner of Police & Ors.

Sunil Kapoor and Anrs Vs B.S.E.S. Yamuna Power Limited

Manjeet Solanki Vs the State NCT of Delhi & Anr. & Ors.

Suman Vs the State of NCT of Delhi

Geeta Vs State

Parwez Alam & Ors. Vs State NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Sushil Panwar Vs Ashwani Panwar

Afsar Vs the State NCT of Delhi