Allowed

Veer Pal Singh & Ors. v. the State of Delhi & Anr.

Delhi HC12 Jan 2024CRL.M.C./311/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court quashed an FIR and related proceedings under Sections 308/341/504/506/34 IPC following a compromise between the petitioners and the complainant. Relying on Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, the Court held that continuation of proceedings was contrary to the interest of justice, subject to the payment of costs.

What did the court decide?

Quashing of FIR No. 476/2015 and all consequential proceedings, subject to payment of cost of Rs. 5,000/- by each petitioner.

Veer Pal Singh & Ors. Vs the State of Delhi & Anr. — Quashing and FIR | Delhi HC (2024)

¶1

$~46

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

CRL.M.C. 311/2024 & CRL.M.A. 1195/2024 (Stay), 1194/2024 (Exemption)

¶4

VEER PAL SINGH & ORS. ..... Petitioners Through: Mr. Sandeep Tyagi, Mr. Ashish Goyal and Mr. Amit Tyagi, Advocates alongwith petitioners in person.

¶5

versus

¶6

THE STATE OF DELHI & ANR. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Sunil Kumar Gautam, APP for the State. SI Abhishek, PS Harsh Vihar. Mr. Vinod Pant, Advocate for R-2 alongwith R-2 in person.

¶7

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT SHARMA

¶8

O R D E R % 12.01.2024

¶9

The present petition filed under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. seeks quashing of the FIR No. 476/2015, under Sections 308/341/504/506/34 of the IPC, registered at P.S. Harsh Vihar and all other consequential proceedings emanating therefrom, including the chargesheet pending before the Court of Ms. Shurbhi Sharma Vats, learned ASJ, Shahdra District, Kardooma Courts, Delhi.

¶10

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submits that parties have resolved their disputes vide compromise deed dated 28.09.2023. The copy of the aforesaid compromise deed dated 28.09.2023 is on record (Annexure P-3).

¶11

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 13/05/2024 at 12:52:07

¶12

Petitioners and complainant/respondent no. 2 are present before the Court and have been duly identified by the Investigating Officer, SI Abhishek, PS Harsh Vihar.

¶13

The complainant/respondent No.2 states that the matter has been settled with the petitioners and he has no objection if the FIR is quashed. 5. In view of the settlement between the parties, learned APP for the State also has no objection if the present FIR is quashed, subject to cost.

¶14

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:-

¶15

“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.”

¶16

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. 476/2015, under Sections 308/341/504/506/34 of the IPC, registered at P.S. Harsh Vihar and all other consequential proceedings emanating therefrom, including the chargesheet pending before the Court of Ms. Shurbhi Sharma Vats, learned ASJ, Shahdra District, Kardooma Courts, Delhi.

¶17

In the interest of justice, the petition is allowed, and the FIR No. 476/2015, under Sections 308/341/504/506/34 of the IPC, registered at P.S. Harsh Vihar and all other consequential proceedings emanating therefrom,

¶18

¶19

including the chargesheet pending before the Court of Ms. Shurbhi Sharma Vats, learned ASJ, Shahdra District, Kardooma Courts, Delhi, is hereby quashed, subject to payment of cost of Rs. 5,000/- to be deposited by each of the petitioners towards a consolidated amount of Rs. 25,000/- with the Delhi High Court Bar Association Employees Welfare Fund within a period of 10 days from today.

¶20

Proof evidencing receipt of deposit shall be filed with the Investigating Officer as well as in Court.

¶21

Petition is allowed and disposed of accordingly. 11. Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.

¶22

AMIT SHARMA, J

¶23

JANUARY 12, 2024/ sn

¶24

This is a digitally signed order.

¶25

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 13/05/2024 at 12:52:07

Veer Pal Singh & Ors. v. the State of Delhi & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Veer Pal Singh & Ors. v. the State 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

Hari Rattan and Another Vs the State Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Gautam Kumar & Ors. Vs Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Rajesh Vs State & Anr.

Aashish Singh Vs State of NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Ram Avtar Gupta and Anr. Vs State of NCT of Delhi

Sh. Yasar Khan Vs the State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi)