Disposed

Ishan Mathur v. State & Anr.

Delhi HC5 Nov 2024W.P.(CRL)/2590/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petition sought quashing of FIR for stalking and online harassment via fake social media profiles after parties settled before mediation centre. Complainant affirmed settlement voluntarily; court quashed FIR subject to petitioner paying Rs. 50,000 costs to respondent no.2.

What did the court decide?

FIR No. 17/2022 and consequent proceedings quashed, subject to payment of Rs. 50,000/- cost to respondent no.2 within four weeks.

Ishan Mathur Vs State & Anr. — Quashing and FIR | Delhi HC (2024)

¶1

$~38

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- W.P.(CRL) 2590/2023

¶4

ISHAN MATHUR .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Vipul Chaudhary and Mr. Sachin Anand, Advocates with petitioner in person. versus STATE & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Yasir Rauf Ansari, ASC (Crl.) for the State with Mr. Alok Sharma and Mr. Vasu Agarwal, Advocates with SI Deepak PS Kishangarh, Delhi. Respondent no.2 in person.

¶5

CORAM:

¶6

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

¶7

% 05.11.2024

¶8

The present proceedings are instituted on behalf of the petitioner seeking quashing of FIR No. 17/2022 registered under Sections 354D/509 IPC at Police Station Kishangarh, Delhi on the ground that the parties have amicably settled their disputes.

¶9

As per the allegations levelled in the FIR, the petitioner made fake social media profiles by using respondent No.2’s name and photographs and made inappropriate comments and threatened to harm her, causing her mental distress.

¶10

Mr. Yasir Rauf Ansari, learned ASC (Crl.) for the State, on instructions, submits that the petitioner is the only accused and respondent No. 2 is the complainant/victim in the present case. He further submits that the charge sheet has already been filed and that during the course of

¶11

This is a digitally signed order.

¶12

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 11/11/2024 at 11:35:25

¶13

investigation, Sections 66C and 67 IT Act were added against the petitioner. Learned ASC also submits that even though the parties have compromised, keeping in view the serious nature of the allegations and that the state machinery has already been put in motion, the petitioner be saddled with hefty costs.

¶14

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the present FIR was registered due to a misunderstanding and with the intervention of the elders, close relatives and well-wishers, the parties have amicably settled their disputes before the Delhi Govt. Mediation & Conciliation Centre on 30.06.2023, a copy whereof has been placed on record. In terms of the said settlement, respondent No. 2/complainant is now left with no claims or grievances against the petitioners.

¶15

The petitioner is present in Court and is identified by his counsel as well as by the Investigating Officer/ SI Deepak PS Kishangarh, Delhi.

¶16

Respondent No. 2 is also present in Court and is identified by the Investigating Officer.

¶17

The petitioner has shown remorse for his conduct and undertakes not to repeat the same in future. Respondent No. 2 states that she has entered into the aforementioned settlement out of her own free will, volition and without any coercion. She further states that he has no objection if the present FIR and consequent proceedings are quashed.

¶18

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that no other proceedings are pending between the parties.

¶19

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

¶20

In view of the above facts and since no useful purpose will be served

¶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 11/11/2024 at 11:35:25

¶23

in continuance of the proceedings, it is directed that the aforesaid FIR and the consequent proceedings arising therefrom are hereby quashed, subject to the payment of cost of Rs.50,000/- to be paid by the petitioner to the respondent No.2 by way of demand draft and/or banking transaction into the account of respondent No.2/father of respondent No.2, through the I.O., within a period of four weeks from today.

¶24

Proof evidencing payment of costs shall be filed with the Investigating Officer.

¶25

With the above directions, the petition is disposed of.

¶26

In case proof of deposit of cost is not filed within two weeks, the IO shall be at liberty to move an appropriate application in this regard.

¶27

MANOJ KUMAR OHRI, J

¶28

NOVEMBER 5, 2024/ rd

¶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 11/11/2024 at 11:35:25

Ishan Mathur v. State & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ishan Mathur v. State & 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

Rohit @ Moi Vs State NCT of Delhi and Ors.

Vikram Bhasin Vs Central Bureau Ofinvestigation

Shri Vinay Maloo and Ors. & Ors. Vs State of NCT of Delhi and Anr. & Anr.

Raj Kumar Vs Reserve Bank of India & Ors.

Pulkit Singh Vs the State & Anr.

Priyanshi Patel and Anr. Vs the State (Nct of Delhi) and Ors.

Kundan Kumar Singh Vs Union of India through Ministry of Home Affairs & Ors.

Nadir Shah Vs State of NCT of Delhi

Jitendra Kumar Vs Securities Exchange Board of India & Anr.

Pratik Kumar Vs Neema Pandey

Ms. Shabana Azmi Vs the State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) & Ors.

Abhishek Jain & Anr. Vs Sachin Jain

Anil Kumar Jain Vs Sachin Jain

Abdul Khalid Saifi @ Khalid Saifi Vs State of NCT of Delhi