Allowed

Vimlesh & Ors. v. the State Govt of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Delhi HC6 Sept 2024CRL.M.C./7034/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Delhi quashed FIR No. 260/2005 and consequent proceedings alleging grievous hurt after parties settled disputes amicably. Petitioners were directed to deposit Rs. 25,000 as cost with the State Legal Services Authority for POCSO victim support, otherwise proceedings may resume.

What did the court decide?

Quashing of FIR No. 260/2005 and consequent proceedings; directing petitioners to deposit Rs. 25,000 as cost with Delhi State Legal Services Authority within two weeks.

Vimlesh & Ors. Vs the State Govt of NCT of Delhi & Ors. — Writ and Judicial Review | Delhi HC (2024)

¶1

$~73

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- CRL.M.C. 7034/2024

¶4

VIMLESH & ORS. .....Petitioners

¶5

Through: Mr. Manoj Kumar Sharma and Mr. Sanjeev Shukla, Advocates.

¶6

versus

¶7

THE STATE GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr.Nawal Kishore Jha, APP for State with SI Suresh Kumar Meena, PS New Usman Pur (9968256274).

¶8

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR OHRI O R D E R % 06.09.2024

¶9

CRL.M.A. 26878/2024

¶10

Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

¶11

Application is disposed of.

¶12

CRL.M.C. 7034/2024

¶13

The present petition has been filed seeking quashing of FIR No. 260/2005 registered under Sections 307/323/34 IPC at P.S. New Usmanpur, Delhi on the ground that the parties have amicably settled their disputes.

¶14

As per the allegations levelled in the FIR, during an altercation between the parties, the petitioners inflicted injuries on the respondent No. 3 using an ice cutter.

¶15

Learned APP for the State, on instructions, submits that respondent No. 2 & 3 are the complainants in the present case. It is further submitted that the chargesheet has been filed. It is also submitted that the injuries by the ice cutter were caused by the accused persons, including one Jitender @ Kallu , who has since then expired and his death certificate, a copy of which

¶16

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 11/09/2024 at 12:35:13

¶17

has been placed on record, has been verified. Another accused, namely Shyam Sunder , against whom also the chargesheet has been filed, has also expired since then and his death certificate has also been verified. Learned APP further contends that though the parties have compromised, some cost may be imposed on the petitioners since the State machinery has already been put in motion and the allegations were of grave nature.

¶18

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners and respondent No. 2 & 3 are neighbours residing in the same vicinity and that the present FIR was registered due to a misunderstanding and with the intervention of family members and friends, the parties have amicably settled their disputes vide Compromise Deed dated 31.08.2024, a copy of which has been placed on record. In terms of the said settlement, the complainants are now left with no claim or grievance against the petitioners.

¶19

It is informed that a cross FIR No. 0235/2009 has also been registered under Sections 325/379/356/506/34 IPC at Police Station New Usmanpur , Delhi against the relatives of respondent No. 2 & 3 on the complaint of petitioner No. 4, which has also been quashed vide today’s order passed in CRL.M.C. 6740/2024.

¶20

The petitioners, who are present in Court, have been identified by their counsel as well as the I.O./SI Suresh Kumar Meena, PS New Usman Pur, Delhi. Respondent No. 2 & 3 are also present in Court and have been identified by the I.O.

¶21

The petitioners have shown remorse for their conduct and undertake not to repeat the same in future. Respondent No. 2 & 3 also state that they have entered into the aforementioned Compromise Deed out of their own free will, volition and without any coercion. They further state that they

¶22

This is a digitally signed order.

¶23

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 11/09/2024 at 12:35:13

¶24

have no objection if the present FIR and consequent proceedings are quashed.

¶25

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

¶26

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

¶27

In view of the above facts and considering that no useful purpose will be served 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 cumulative cost of Rs.25,000/- to be deposited by the petitioners with the Delhi State Legal Services Authority (Account No.18580110053263, UCO Bank, Branch Rouse Avenue, IFSC: UCBA0003364) within a period of two weeks from today. The amount so deposited shall be utilized by the Delhi State Legal Services Authority for providing counselling/psychological support to POCSO victims requiring such assistance.

¶28

Proof evidencing receipt of deposit shall be filed with the I.O.

¶29

A copy of this order be communicated to the Member Secretary, Delhi State Legal Services Authority for intimation.

¶30

With the above directions, the petition is disposed of alongwith miscellaneous application.

¶31

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

¶32

MANOJ KUMAR OHRI, J

¶33

SEPTEMBER 6, 2024/ akc

¶34

Vimlesh & Ors. v. the State Govt of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vimlesh & Ors. v. the State Govt of NCT of Delhi & 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

Sh Dinesh Singhania Vs State NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Rahul Tyagi & Anr. Vs State of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Sh Amir Khan & Ors. Vs State Govt of NCT of Delhi and Anr.

M/S Investors Clinic Infratech Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. Vs State NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Mr. P.L. Fotedar Vs the State (Gnct Ofdelhi) through Police Station/Io/Sho & Anr.

Ms Vandana Tushir Vs the State & Anr.