Allowed¶35

Manoj Kumar v. State of Delhi & Anr. & Ors.

Delhi HC7 Feb 2025CRL.M.C./2327/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Section 482 CrPC quashing of FIR on settlement/compromise between parties; FIR No.143/2017, Police Station Swaroop Nagar, New Delhi; Sections 354/342/354-A/354B/506/509 IPC; chances of conviction remote and bleak; continuation an exercise in futility; abuse of process; Jagdish Khatri vs. State of NCT of Delhi and Anr., 2023 SCC OnLine Del 1336; Gian Singh v. State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303; Madhavrao Jiwajirao Scindia v. Sambhajirao Chandrojiroo Angre (1988) 1 SCC 692; Manoj Kumar; State of Delhi; Justice Vikas Mahajan; CRL.M.C. 2327/2024.

What did the court decide?

Quashing of FIR No.143/2017 under Sections 354/342/354-A/354-B/506/509 IPC registered at Police Station Swaroop Nagar, New Delhi, along with all other consequential proceedings emanating therefrom. ¶35

Manoj Kumar Vs State of Delhi & Anr. & Ors. — Delhi HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Quashing of FIR No.143/2017 under Sections 354/342/354-A/354-B/506/509 IPC registered at Police Station Swaroop Nagar, New Delhi, along with all other consequential proceedings emanating therefrom.

¶35

Issue for consideration

Whether FIR No.143/2017 under Sections 354/342/354-A/354B/506/509 IPC registered at Police Station Swaroop Nagar, New Delhi, and all consequential proceedings emanating therefrom, should be quashed under Section 482 CrPC on the ground that the parties have arrived at a settlement.

¶14

Court's answer

In view of the settlement between the parties, the ultimate chances of conviction in the case are bleak; continuation of criminal proceedings will not serve any useful purpose and will be an exercise in futility.

¶31

Ratio / Principle

It is in the interest of justice that the present FIR and all the other proceedings emanating therefrom be quashed.

¶34

Key takeaways

Consequently, the petition is allowed and FIR No.143/2017 under Sections 354/342/354-A/354-B/506/509 IPC registered at Police Station Swaroop Nagar, New Delhi, along with all other consequential proceedings emanating therefrom, is quashed.ratio¶35

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

CRL.M.C. 2327/2024 (High Court of Delhi, Vikas Mahan, J., order dated 07.02.2025): Petition under Section 482 CrPC by Manoj Kumar seeking quashing of FIR No.143/2017 under Sections 354/342/354-A/354B/506/509 IPC registered at Police Station Swaroop Nagar, New Delhi, and all consequential proceedings, on the ground that the parties amicably resolved their disputes (Settlement dated 07.03.2024, Annexure P-4); respondent no. 2, present in Court, affirmed the factum of settlement and raised no objection, and the State (through the learned APP) likewise had no objection. Relying on the Co-ordinate bench decision in Jagdish Khatri vs. State of NCT of Delhi and Anr., 2023 SCC OnLine Del 1336 (which quotes Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, (2012) 10 SCC 303, and Madhavrao Jiwajirao Scindia v. Sambhajirao Chandrojiroo Angre, (1988) 1 SCC 692), the Court held that with the settlement the ultimate chances of conviction were bleak, that continuation of the criminal proceedings would be an exercise in futility, and that it was in the interest of justice to quash the FIR and all consequential proceedings; the petition was accordingly allowed.

¶1

$~17

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- CRL.M.C. 2327/2024

¶4

MANOJ KUMAR .....Petitioner

¶5

Through: Mr. Manoj Kumar Mahaur, Mr. Yogesh Choudhary and Mr. Neeraj Kumar, Advs. with petitioner in person.

¶6

versus

¶7

STATE OF DELHI & ANR. & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Ms. Kiran Bairwa, APP for State with SI Neelam PS Swaroop Nagar Respondent no. 2 in person.

¶8

CORAM:

¶9

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS MAHAJAN

¶10

CRL.M.A. 8957/2024 (exemption)

¶11

Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

¶12

Application stands disposed of.

¶13

CRL.M.C. 2327/2024

¶14

The present petition has been filed under Section 482 CrPC seeking quashing of FIR No.143/2017 under Sections 354/342/354-A/354B/506/509 IPC registered at Police Station Swaroop Nagar, New Delhi and all consequential proceedings emanating therefrom on the ground that the parties have arrived at a settlement.

¶15

Issue notice. The learned APP for the State accepts notice. She

¶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 17/02/2025 at 17:27:00

¶17

submits that since the parties have arrived at a settlement, the State has no objection in case the FIR in question is quashed.

¶18

The petitioner no.1, as well as, respondent no. 2 are present in the Court and they have been identified by the learned counsel for the petitioner, as well as, by the Investigating Officer SI Neelam PS Swaroop Nagar.

¶19

The brief facts of the case are that the FIR was registered at the instance of respondent no. 2 alleging that the petitioner had misbehaved with her and thereafter also threatened her. 7. During the pendency of the proceedings, the parties have arrived at a settlement, terms whereof were reduced in writing in the form of Settlement dated 07.03.2024, which is annexed as Annexure P-4 to the present petition. 8. In terms of the said settlement, the parties have amicably resolved all their disputes and grievances without any force, coercion, threat. 9. The respondent no.2, who is present in Court, on a query posed by the Court, affirms the factum of settlement and states that she has no objection in case the FIR is quashed.

¶20

In this regard, reference may advantageously be made to a decision of Co-ordinate bench of this Court in Jagdish Khatri vs. State of NCT of Delhi and Anr.¹ wherein it was held as under:

¶21

4. The inherent power under Section 482 Cr. P.C. is of wide plenitude with no statutory limitation but it has to be exercised in accord with the guidance engrafted in such power viz. : (i) to secure the ends of justice, or (ii) to prevent abuse of the process of any court. In the case of Gian Singh v. State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303, the Supreme Court has observed that in the exercise of its inherent power under Section 482, the High Court can quash FIR/Charge-sheet on the basis of alleged settlement except in

¶22

1 2023 SCC OnLine Del 1336.

¶23

This is a digitally signed order.

¶24

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 17/02/2025 at 17:27:00

¶25

cases of rape, murder, dacoity or the cases under the Special Statutes like Prevention of Corruption Act or the offences committed by public servants while working in that capacity etc. It is a settled proposition of law that High Courts should exercise the power under Section 482 Cr. P.C. for quashing of criminal cases having overwhelmingly and predominantly civil flavour.

¶26

5. It has also been repeatedly held that the High Court may quash the criminal proceedings if in its view, because of the compromise between the offender and the victim, the possibility of conviction is remote and bleak and continuation of the criminal case would put the accused to great oppression and prejudice and extreme injustice would be caused to him by not quashing the criminal case despite full and complete settlement and compromise with the victim. Reliance can be placed upon Madhavrao Jiwajirao Scindia v. Sambhajirao Chandrojiroo Angre, (1988) 1 SCC 692.

¶27

6. Respondent no. 2 is present in court and has duly been identified by the IO. She states that she has entered into the settlement voluntarily and she has no objection if the FIR is quashed. Affidavit of Respondent no. 2 has also been placed on record.

¶28

7. In view of the above, it appears that he is not going to support the case of the prosecution and the possibility of conviction is remote and bleak. In view of the matter, the continuation of the criminal proceedings would be an exercise in futility and it is an abuse of the process of the court. There would no purpose in continuing with the present proceedings and accordingly, the FIR No. 157/2017 under Sections 354 IPC registered at Police Station Sangam Vihar and all the other proceedings emanating therefrom are quashed.

¶29

8. The present petition stands disposed of.

¶30

(emphasis supplied)

¶31

In view of the settlement between the parties, the ultimate chances of conviction in the case are bleak, therefore, continuation of criminal proceedings will not serve any useful purpose and it will be an exercise in futility.

¶32

This is a digitally signed order.

¶33

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 17/02/2025 at 17:27:00

¶34

It is, thus, in the interest of justice that the present FIR and all the other proceedings emanating therefrom be quashed.

¶35

Consequently, the petition is allowed and the FIR No.143/2017 under Sections 354/342/354-A/354-B/506/509 IPC registered at Police Station Swaroop Nagar, New Delhi along with all other consequential proceedings emanating therefrom, is quashed.

¶36

The petition stands disposed of in the above terms.

¶37

Order be uploaded on the website of this Court.

¶38

VIKAS MAHAJAN, J

¶39

FEBRUARY 7, 2025 N.S. ASWAL

¶40

This is a digitally signed order.

¶41

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 17/02/2025 at 17:27:00

Manoj Kumar v. State of Delhi & Anr. & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manoj Kumar v. State of Delhi & Anr. & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sonu Kumar & Ors. Vs State NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Mohd. Naim Vs State of N.C.T. of Delhi and Others

Harish and Anr. Vs State Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Jomoldin Sattarov Vs Commissioner of Customs

Manjeet Vs the State (Nct) of Delhi & Anr.

Amit Madaan @ Raju Vs the State (Govt of NCT of Delhi)