Allowed

Jatin & Anr. v. the State & Ors.

Delhi HC15 Jul 2024CRL.M.C./3524/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Cross-FIRs arising from a 2014 quarrel at a shop, under Sections 354/354A/392/509/34 IPC and Section 8 POCSO, were sought to be quashed on the basis of a settlement. The Court held the allegations were of a private dispute with remote chances of conviction and quashed both FIRs.

What did the court decide?

FIR Nos. 428/2014 & 436/2014 PS Anand Vihar and proceedings emanating therefrom quashed.

Jatin & Anr. Vs the State & Ors. — Quashing and FIR | Delhi HC (2024)

¶1

$~35 & 36

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- CRL.M.C. 3524/2024

¶4

JATIN & ANR. .....Petitioners

¶5

Through: Mr. Gautam Pal, Adv.

¶6

versus

¶7

THE STATE & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Hitesh Vali, APP for the State with SI Khushbu Jha, PS Anand Vihar.

¶8

¶9

- CRL.M.C. 3798/2024

¶10

SABIN KHAN @ SABINA KHAN & ANR. .....Petitioners

¶11

Through: Mr. Gautam Pal, Adv.

¶12

versus

¶13

THE STATE & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Hitesh Vali, APP for the State with SI Khushbu Jha, PS Anand Vihar.

¶14

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANISH DAYAL

¶15

O R D E R

¶16

% 15.07.2024

¶17

These petitions have been filed seeking quashing of FIR Nos. 428/2014 & 436/2014 PS Anand Vihar under Sections 354/354A/392/509/34 IPC & Section 8 of the POCSO Act on the basis of a settlement arrived at between the parties dated 21^st October, 2023.

¶18

Cross-FIRs have been filed arising out of an incident on 13^th July,

¶19

This is a digitally signed order.

¶20

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 02/07/2025 at 12:02:54

¶21

2014 at the Shiv Tikki Shop at Karkardooma Community Centre when objections were taken at some of accused by the complainant and the complainant was pushed back and bad language was used. The FIR No.428/2014 was accordingly registered at the behest of the complainants.

¶22

Thereafter, the FIR was registered at the behest of the wife of the accused against the complainants alleging that the complainants had in fact pulled them out of the car and used strong words. 4. Perusal of the complaints shows that it is a private issue between the parties arising out of a quarrel and ex-facie there is no allegation apparent leading to an offence under Section 392 IPC or POCSO for that matter. 5. In any event, all the parties are present before the Court and duly identified by the IO and seek to settle their issues by virtue of the settlement. 6. Considering the above settlement between the parties and the chances of conviction of the petitioners being remote and bleak, there is no use continuing with proceedings of the present FIRs as it would be a misuse of the process of the Court and an unnecessary burden on the State exchequer. Accordingly, the petition is allowed. Consequently, the FIR Nos. 428/2014 & 436/2014 PS Anand Vihar under Sections 354/354A/392/509/34 IPC & Section 8 of the POCSO Act and proceedings emanating therefrom are quashed.

¶23

Parties shall abide by the terms of settlement.

¶24

Accordingly, the petition is disposed of. Pending applications (if any) are disposed of as infructuous.

¶25

Order be uploaded on the website of this Court.

¶26

ANISH DAYAL, J

¶27

JULY 15, 2024/MK

¶28

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 02/07/2025 at 12:02:54

Jatin & Anr. v. the State & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jatin & Anr. v. the State & Ors.

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

State (Nct of Delhi) Vs Anil & Anr.

Sh. Harish Sharma Vs State (Nct of Delhi) & Anr.

Hansraj Vs the State of NCT Delhi

Usha Devi Vs the Govt. of NCT of Delhi

Kallu@ Manoj@ Manoj Kumar & Ors. Vs the State (N.C.T. of Delhi) & Ors.

Manish Singh & Ors. Vs the State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) & Anr.