Allowed

Nazam v. State (N.C.T. of Delhi) & Anr.

Delhi HC22 Jan 2024W.P.(CRL)/203/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought quashing of an FIR under Section 482 CrPC due to settlement with the complainant. The High Court found no objection from parties and the State. It quashed the FIR and consequential proceedings citing amicable resolution.

What did the court decide?

FIR No. 38/2020 and all consequential proceedings before the Metropolitan Magistrate, Mahila Court-03, including the chargesheet, are hereby quashed.

Nazam Vs State (N.C.T. of Delhi) & Anr. — Quashing and FIR | Delhi HC (2024)

¶1

$~63

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- W.P.(CRL) 203/2024 & CRL.M.A. 1907/2024 (Exemption)

¶4

NAZAM ..... Petitioner

¶5

Through: Mr. Suhail Shah, Ms. Reena Yadav and Mr. S.K. Mandal, Advocates alongwith petitioner in person.

¶6

versus

¶7

STATE (N.C.T. OF DELHI) & ANR. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Anand V. Khatri, ASC for the State. SI Ritu, PS Nangloi. R-2 in person.

¶8

CORAM:

¶9

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT SHARMA

¶10

O R D E R % 22.01.2024

¶11

The present petition under Section 482 of the CrPC seeks quashing of FIR No. 38/2020, under Section 354/506/509 of the IPC, registered at PS Nangloi, Delhi and all other consequential proceedings emanating therefrom, including the chargesheet filed and pending before the Court of Ms. Alka Singh, learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Mahila Court-03, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi.

¶12

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the latter and respondent no. 2 are known to each other and on account of some misunderstanding, the present FIR was registered at the instance of respondent no. 2. It is further submitted that during the pendency of the aforesaid proceedings, parties have entered into a settlement agreement/MOU dated 06.11.2023, in pursuance of which respondent no. 2

¶13

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 15/06/2024 at 11:34:13

¶14

has no objection if the present FIR alongwith the consequent proceedings is quashed.

¶15

Petitioner and complainant/respondent no. 2 are present before the Court and have been duly identified by the Investigating Officer, SI Ritu, PS Nangloi.

¶16

The complainant/respondent no.2 states that the matter has been settled with the petitioner and she has no objection if the FIR is quashed against the petitioner. She further states that all the terms of the settlement have been complied with.

¶17

In view of the settlement between the parties, learned APP for the State also has no objection if the present FIR is quashed.

¶18

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

¶19

“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 proceedings.”

¶20

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 continuing with the present FIR No. 38/2020, under Section 354/506/509 of the IPC, registered at PS Nangloi, Delhi and all other consequential proceedings emanating therefrom, including the chargesheet filed and

¶21

This is a digitally signed order.

¶22

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 15/06/2024 at 11:34:13

¶23

pending before the Court of Ms. Alka Singh, learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Mahila Court-03, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi.

¶24

In the interest of justice, the petition is allowed, and the FIR No. 38/2020, under Section 354/506/509 of the IPC, registered at PS Nangloi, Delhi and all other consequential proceedings emanating therefrom, including the chargesheet filed and pending before the Court of Ms. Alka Singh, learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Mahila Court-03, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi, is hereby quashed.

¶25

Petition is allowed and disposed of accordingly.

¶26

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

¶27

AMIT SHARMA, J

¶28

JANUARY 22, 2024 /sn

¶29

This is a digitally signed order.

¶30

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 15/06/2024 at 11:34:13

Nazam v. State (N.C.T. of Delhi) & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nazam v. State (N.C.T. of Delhi) & 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

Nazia Ali Vs State of Delhi & Anr.

Maksood Ahmad Vs State of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Madeena Vs State/Nct of Delhi & Ors.

Israr Ahmad Vs the State of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Gunjan Sharma & Anr. Vs State of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Renu Bajaj and Ors. Vs State Ofnct of Delhi and Anr.

Reena Grover Vs Sh. Ramesh Grover & Ors.

Satish Dhull Vs State Govt. of NCT of Delhi

Akshay Vs State

Rachana Agarwal Vs Keltech Infrastructure Limited

Rachana Agarwal Vs Keltech Infrastructure Limited

Davinder Kumar & Ors. Vs the State NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Mr. Rohit Sharma Vs the State NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Raj Pal Vs State of N.C.T. of Delhi