Allowed

Mohd Arif @ Aarif and Anr. v. the State Gnct of Delhi and Anr.

Delhi HC6 Sept 2024CRL.M.C./7033/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Delhi High Court condoned a 347-day delay in re-filing a petition and subsequently quashed an FIR and all related proceedings following a compromise deed between the petitioners and the accused, citing settled principles to prevent future litigation.

What did the court decide?

FIR No.410/2017 and all proceedings arising therefrom are quashed and closed. Delay in re-filing the petition is condoned.

Mohd Arif @ Aarif and Anr. Vs the State Gnct of Delhi and Anr. — Quashing and FIR | Delhi HC (2024)

¶1

$~50

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- CRL.M.C. 7033/2024 & CRL.M.A. 26871/2024, MOHD ARIF @ AARIF AND ANR .....Petitioners

¶4

Through: Mr. Surendra Kumar Roy, Advocate alongwith petitioners.

¶5

versus

¶6

THE STATE GNCT OF DELHI AND ANR .....Respondents Through: Ms. Shubhi Gupta, APP for the State with SI Pinki Rana, P.S. Malviya Nagar. Mr. Ajay Sharma, Advocate for R2 alongwith R2.

¶7

CORAM:

¶8

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI O R D E R % 06.09.2024

¶9

CRL.M.A. 26872/2024 (for condonation of delay)

¶10

By way of the present application filed under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 (‘Cr.P.C.’), the petitioner seeks condonation of 347 days’ delay in re-filing the petition.

¶11

For the reasons stated in the application, which is duly supported by an affidavit, the application is allowed.

¶12

Delay in re-filing the petition is condoned.

¶13

The petition is taken on Board.

¶14

The application stands disposed-of.

¶15

CRL.M.C. 7033/2024

¶16

By way of the present petition filed under section 482 of the Cr.P.C., the petitioners seek quashing of case FIR No.410/2017 dated

¶17

Page 1 of 3

¶18

CRL.M.C. 7033/2024

¶19

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 09:22:10

¶20

27.10.2017 registered under sections 354/354-D/506/509 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (‘IPC’) at P.S.: Malviya Nagar, New Delhi.

¶21

The petition is premised on Compromise Deed dated 20.09.2023, whereby the petitioners and respondent No.2 have resolved the matter amicably.

¶22

The petition is also supported by affidavits of the petitioners and of respondent No. 2, alongwith proof of their I.D.s.

¶23

The contesting parties are present in court. Their credentials have been verified and they have also been identified by their respective counsel. Respondent No.2 has also been identified by the Investigating Officer.

¶24

The court has interacted with respondent No.2 , as also with petitioners, who have confirmed that they have now resolved the matter and a Compromise Deed dated 20.09.2023 has been signed by them closing all issues amicably. Parties now wish to live in peace and harmony going forward.

¶25

Ms. Shubhi Gupta, learned APP confirms that the State has no objection to the subject FIR being quashed.

¶26

In the circumstances, in line with the law laid down by the Supreme Court in Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab & Anr. reported as (2012) 10 SCC 303 as also in Narinder Singh & Ors. vs. State of Punjab & Anr. reported as (2014) 6 SCC 466, this court sees no reason why the subject FIR and all proceedings emanating therefrom should not be quashed. This court is of the view that in light of the settlement between the contesting parties, continuing with the subject FIR and all

Page 2 of 3

CRL.M.C. 7033/2024

subsequent proceedings would be an exercise in futility and would not be conducive to peace and harmony between the parties.

¶31

Accordingly case FIR No.410/2017 dated 27.10.2017 registered under sections 354/354-D/506/509 of the IPC at P.S.: Malviya Nagar, New Delhi is quashed. All proceedings arising therefrom also stand closed.

¶32