Quashed

Harkesh Kumar v. State Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Delhi HC14 Feb 2024CRL.M.C./676/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner sought quashing of an FIR registered under Sections 509, 354, and 506 IPC alleging inappropriate touching and abuse. The Court noted an amicable settlement between the parties through family intervention. Finding no utility in continuing the proceedings and noting no coercion, the Court quashed the FIR.

What did the court decide?

FIR No. 188/2019 and proceedings emanating thereunder quashed.

Harkesh Kumar Vs State Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Anr. — Quashing and FIR | Delhi HC (2024)

¶1

$~67

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

% Date of Decision: 14.02.2024

¶4

CRL.M.C. 676/2024 HARKESH KUMAR ..... Petitioner Through: Mr.Rishabh Gulati and Mr.Tribhuwan Rathi, Advocates with Petitioner-inperson.

¶5

versus

¶6

STATE GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR. ..... Respondents Through: Ms.Kiran Bairwa, APP with SI Sandeep Yadav, PS: DBG Road. Mr.Mayank Bhargava, Advocate with Respondent No. 2-in-person.

¶7

CORAM:

¶8

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR MENDIRATTA % J U D G M E N T ANOOP KUMAR MENDIRATTA, J (ORAL) CRL.M.A. 2761/2024

¶9

Exemption allowed, subject to just exceptions.

¶10

Application stands disposed of.

¶11

CRL.M.C. 676/2024

¶12

1. Petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (‘Cr.P.C.’) has been preferred on behalf of the petitioner for quashing of FIR No. 188/2019, under Section 509 IPC registered at P.S.: DBG Road and proceedings emanating therefrom. Sections 354/506 IPC have been subsequently invoked by the prosecution.

¶13

2. Issue notice. Learned APP for the State and learned counsel for respondent No.2 alongwith respondent No.2 in person appear on advance notice and accept notice.

¶14

3. In brief, as per the case of the petitioner, respondent No.2 is niece of the petitioner and on the alleged date of the incident, in a fit of anger,

¶15

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:DINESH CHANDRA Signing Da te:2 1.02.2024 16:04:22

¶16

CRL.M.C. 676/2024

¶17

Page 1 of 2

¶18

petitioner is alleged to have abused and touched the complainant inappropriately, as a result of which, present FIR was registered.

¶19

4. The matter is stated to have been amicably resolved between the parties vide Settlement Deed dated 07.10.2023 with the intervention of family members and close relations as the disputes pertain to minor issues. 5. Learned APP for the State submits that in view of amicable settlement between the parties, the State has no objection in case the FIR in question is quashed.

¶20

6. Petitioner as well as respondent No. 2 are present in person and have been identified by SI Sandeep Yadav, PS: DBG Road. I have interacted with the parties and they confirm that the matter has been amicably settled between them without any threat, pressure or coercion. Respondent No. 2 states that nothing remains to be further adjudicated upon between the parties and she has no objection in case the FIR in question is quashed.

¶21

7. Considering the facts and circumstances, since the matter has been amicably settled between the parties, no useful purpose shall be served by keeping the case pending. It would be nothing but an abuse of the process of Court. Consequently, FIR No. 188/2019, under Sections 509/354/506 IPC registered at P.S.: DBG Road and the proceedings emanating therefrom stand quashed.

¶22

Petition is accordingly disposed of. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.

¶23

A copy of this order be forwarded to the concerned Court for information.

¶24

ANOOP KUMAR MENDIRATTA, J.

¶25

FEBRUARY 14, 2024 /v

¶26

Signature Not Verified

¶27

CRL.M.C. 676/2024

¶28

Page 2 of 2

¶29

Digitally Signed By:DINESH CHANDRA Signing Da te:2 1.02.2024 16:04:22

Harkesh Kumar v. State Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Harkesh Kumar v. 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rakesh Kumar Vs State Govt of NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Sanoj Haldar @ Sanju Vs the State of Delhi

Hansraj Surana Vs State of NCT of Delhi

Mohammad Yasin Malik Vs Union of India & Ors.

Vijay Gupta and Ors. Vs State and Anr.

Fawadullah Khan @ Fawabullah Khan and Others Vs State (Nct) of Delhi and Another