Sanjay Singh & ANR. v. State & ANR.

$~68 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. 913/2020 SANJAY SINGH & ANR.

..... Petitioners Through: Mr. Kulvardhan Sharma, Advocate alongwith petitioners in person.

Versus

STATE & ANR.

..... Respondents Through: Ms. Manjeet Arya, APP for State with ASI Rameshwar, P.S. Mehrauli Mr. Deepak Pathak, Advocate for respondent No. 2 in person.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR OHRI

O R D E R

% 18.02.2020 1.

The present proceedings are instituted seeking quashing of FIR No. 680/2017, under Section 135 of Indian Electricity Act (Amendment), 2003 registered at P.S. Mehrauli, Delhi on the ground that parties have settled their disputes.

2.

The allegations in the present FIR are that respondent no.2-BSES Rajdhani Power Ltd. carried out an inspection on 05.10.2016 at the premises of the petitioner wherein petitioner was found indulging in direct theft of electricity, which led to registration of the aforesaid FIR. 3.

Ms. Manjeet Arya, learned APP for the State, submits that the charge sheet in the present case has been filed under the aforesaid section against the petitioners and respondent no.2 is the only complainant. 4.

The learned counsels for the parties submit that they have entered into a settlement before Permanent Lok Adalat on 10.12.2017. A copy of the CRL.M.C. 913/2020

same is annexed with the petition as Annexure P-2. In terms of the settlement, the petitioners have paid the settled amount of Rs.88,000/- to respondent No.2 company, in respect of which 'No Dues' certificate has been issued by respondent No.2 company. A copy of the same is annexed as Annexure P-3 (colly) with the petition. In terms of the settlement respondent No.2, is now, left with no claim whatsoever against the petitioners. 5.

Learned counsel for respondent no. 2 states that he has instructions from respondent no.2 to state before this Court that the petitioners and respondent no.2 have indeed settled their disputes and respondent no.2 has no objection if the present FIR and the consequent proceedings are quashed. 6.

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

7.

The parties are bound by the statements made in Court today. 8.

In view of the fact that the parties have amicably settled their dispute, no useful purpose will be served in continuance of criminal proceedings against the petitioners. It is accordingly directed that the aforesaid FIR and the consequent proceedings arising therefrom are hereby quashed. 9.

The petition is disposed of.

10.

Copy of the order be given dasti to the learned counsels for the parties.

MANOJ KUMAR OHRI, J FEBRUARY 18, 2020/p'ma CRL.M.C. 913/2020