Pradeep Jindal v. State & ANR.

$~55 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + PRADEEP JINDAL ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Chirag Khurana, Advocate alongwith petitioner in person

Versus

STATE & ANR.

..... Respondents Through: Dr. M.P. Singh, APP for State with ASI Jitendra Singh, P.S. Model Town Respondent No. 2 in person

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR OHRI

O R D E R

% 02.03.2020 CRL.M.A. 4582/2020 (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. 37/2016 under Section 354 IPC registered at Police Station Model Town, Delhi on the ground of settlement having been arrived at between the parties.

2.

As per the case of the prosecution, the present FIR was registered at the instance of respondent No. 2 as she alleged that she was tortured and sexually assaulted by the petitioner.

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. It is stated that the petitioner is the father-in-law of respondent No. 2.

4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the parties have entered into a settlement vide compromise deed dated 18.01.2020. A copy of the same is annexed with the petition as Annexure-A (colly). In terms of the settlement, respondent no.2 is now left with no claim whatsoever against the petitioner.

5.

The petitioner who is present in person, is identified by his counsel and the Investigating Officer. Respondent No.2, who is also present in person, is identified by the Investigating Officer. The petitioner has shown remorse for his conduct and has undertaken not to repeat the same in future. 6.

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

7.

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

8.

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

9.

In view of the settlement arrived at between the parties, 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.

10.

With the above directions, the petition is disposed of. 11.

Order dasti to the counsels for the parties.

MANOJ KUMAR OHRI, J MARCH 02, 2020/p'ma