Rajesh v. State & ANR.

$~40 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + RAJESH ..... Petitioner Through: Ms. Megha Jain, Advocate with Mr.

Amrit Singh, Advocate alongwith petitioner in person.

Versus

STATE & ANR.

..... Respondents Through: Ms. Radhika Kolluru, APP for State with W/SI Koyal, P.S. Mangolpuri Mr. Krishan Shokeen, Advocate with respondent No. 2 in person.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR OHRI

O R D E R

% 12.02.2020 CRL.M.A. 3184/2020 (Exemption) 1.

Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

2.

The application stands disposed of.

1.

The present proceedings are instituted seeking quashing of FIR No. 155/2014 under Sections 354-A/506/509/341/34 IPC registered at Police Station Mangolpuri, Delhi on the ground of settlement having been arrived at between the petitioner and respondent no. 2. 2.

As per the case of the prosecution, the present FIR has been filed by respondent No. 2 against the present petitioner who sexually assaulted her and threatened her. It is submitted that the petitioner is the Jeth of respondent No. 2.

3.

Learned APP for the State, submits that the charge sheet in the present case has been filed against the present petitioner and respondent no.2 is the only complainant/victim.

4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the disputes between respondent No. 2 and her husband who is the younger brother of the petitioner have already been settled and a petition being CRL.M.C. 786/2020 seeking quashing of FIR No. 462/2013, under Sections 498A/406/34 IPC, P.S. Mangolpuri has also been filed. 5.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner and respondent no.2 have entered into a settlement dated 30.09.2019. A copy of the same is annexed with the petition as Annexure-C. In terms of the settlement, remaining amount of Rs.1,50,000/- has been handed over in court today to respondent No. 2 by way of a demand draft bearing No. 511547 dated 17.12.2019 drawn on ICICI Bank. In terms of the settlement, respondent no.2 is now left with no claim whatsoever against the petitioner. 6.

The Petitioner and respondent No. 2 who are present in person, are identified by their counsels and the Investigating officer. The petitioner has shown remorse for his conduct and has undertaken not to repeat the same in future.

7.

Respondent no. 2 states that she has entered into the settlement with the petitioner out of her own free will, volition and without any undue force, pressure or coercion. She further states that the petitioner has not repeated the same incident and that she has no objection if the present FIR and consequent proceedings are quashed.

8.

Learned counsels for the parties submit that no other proceedings are pending between the parties.

9.

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

10.

In view of the settlement arrived at between the parties, in my view, no useful purpose will be served in continuance of the present criminal proceedings. Accordingly, in the interest of justice, the aforesaid FIR and the consequent proceedings emanating therefrom are hereby quashed, 11.

With the above directions, the petition is disposed of. 12.

Order dasti to the counsels for the parties.

MANOJ KUMAR OHRI, J FEBRUARY 12, 2020/p'ma