Banta Singh v. State (Gnct Of Delhi) And ANR.
$~19 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. 669/2023 BANTA SINGH ..... Petitioner Through:
Mr.
H.S.
Gill, Advocate with petitioner in person.
versus STATE (GNCT OF DELHI) AND ANR ..... Respondents Through:
Mr. Laksh Khanna, APP for State with Inspector Sanjay PS Connaught Place and SI Suraj PS Mehrauli, Delhi.
Respondent No.2 in person.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR OHRI
O R D E R
% 29.04.2024 1.
The present proceedings are instituted under Section 482 Cr.P.C. on behalf of the petitioner seeking quashing of FIR No. 0032/2016 registered under Sections 452/354(B)/509/506/323 IPC at Police Station Mehrauli, New Delhi on the ground that the parties have amicably settled their disputes.
2.
As per the allegations levelled in the FIR are that the petitioner caught hold of the complainant and even gave beatings as a result of which injuries were sustained.
3.
Mr. Laksh Khanna, learned APP for the State, on instructions, submits that the petitioner is the only accused and respondent No.2 is the complainant/victim in the present case. It is further submitted that the charge-sheet has been filed.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
4.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner and respondent No. 2 are relatives and present FIR was registered due to misunderstanding and with the intervention of family members and friends, parties have amicably settled their disputes vide Memorandum of Understanding dated 18.01.2023, a copy of which has been placed on record. In terms of the said settlement, complainant is now left with no claim or grievance against the petitioners.
5.
The petitioner, who is present in Court, has been identified by his counsel as well as the I.O./ Inspector Sanjay PS Connaught Place and SI Suraj PS Mehrauli, Delhi who are present in the Court. Respondent No. 2 is also present in Court and has been identified by the I.O. 6.
The petitioner has shown remorse for his conduct and undertakes not to repeat the same in future. Respondent No. 2 also states that she has entered into the aforementioned MOU out of her own free will, volition and without any coercion. She further states that she has no objection if the present FIR and consequent proceedings are quashed. 7.
The parties shall remain bound by the statements made in Court today.
8.
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 payment of cost of Rs.5,000/- to be paid by the petitioner to the respondent No.2 through IO by way of a demand draft within two weeks. 9.
Proof evidencing receipt of payment shall be filed with the I.O. as well as in Court.
10.
In case the proof payment of cost is not filed within two weeks, the IO The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
shall be at liberty to move an appropriate application in this regard. 11.
The petition is disposed of in above terms.
MANOJ KUMAR OHRI, J APRIL 29, 2024/rd The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.