Konark Banka v. State & ANR.

$~65 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. 2042/2025 KONARK BANKA .....Petitioner Through:

Mr. Amit Chadha, Senior Advocate with Mr. Atin Chadha, Mrs. Munisha Chadha, Mr. Harjas Singh Chhatwal and Mr. Saarthak Sethi, Advocates.

versus STATE & ANR.

.....Respondents Through:

Mr. Shoaib Haider, APP for the State with SI Rekha Chauhan, P.S.Pandav Nagar.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA

O R D E R

% 16.04.2025 CRL.M.A. 9194/2025 (Exemption) 1.

Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions. 2.

The Application stands disposed of.

CRL.M.C. 2042/2025 & CRL.M.A.9193/2025 1.

Criminal Miscellaneous Petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C read with Section 528 BNSS has been filed for quashing of FIR No.0924/2015 dated 24.12.2015 under Section 186/353/333 IPC and 132 of Motor Vehicle Act, P.S.Pandav Nagar.

2.

It is submitted that Petitioner was only 19 years of age at the time of incident and was not mature enough to know the consequences of his act. The Petitioner has demonstrated remorse and The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

rehabilitation. He has tendered an apology to Respondent No.2, the constable which has been accepted by him. Respondent No.2 has also submitted a representation to the office of DCP, Outer North dated 10.02.2025 in this regard. It is further submitted that in case the proceedings are not quashed it would cause undue hardship to the Petitioner and jeopardize his education and future career prospects. He intends to travel to Australia for further studies. He has a bright career ahead. He has clean antecedents and has never been involved in any other criminal case. He is willing to compensate the injured and to abide by any terms that may be imposed by the Court. 3.

The Petitioner who is present in person submits that he is willing to pay Rs.50,000/- as compensation for the injuries suffered by Respondent No.2.

4.

The learned Prosecutor has strongly opposed the present Petition on the ground that it is an offence against the police official which should not be taken lightly. The Respondent No.2 is present in person who has submitted that apology had been tendered to him which he has accepted in his personal capacity. 5.

Submissions heard and record perused.

6.

It was an incident of 2015 wherein on being asked by the police official, Respondent No.2 to stop the vehicle, he had overshot and tried to escape causing injury to Respondent No.2. The Petitioner was a young boy of about 18 years in 2015 and since then he has not been involved in any offence. He is repenting of his deeds. 7.

Considering his young age and the future career, the present FIR and the proceedings emanating therefrom is hereby quashed. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

Compensation as offered be given to Respondent No.2 within seven days. In addition, Rs.50,000/- be deposited in Delhi High Court Advocates' Welfare Trust.

8.

Petition is disposed of.

NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA, J APRIL 16, 2025 rk The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.