Mohd Jahangeer v. State Of Delhi & ANR.

$~27 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(CRL) 992/2024 CRL.M.A. 9463/2024 (Exemption) & CRL.M.A. 9528/2024 (Exemption) MOHD JAHANGEER ..... Petitioner Through:

Mr. Mohd. Shamikh, Adv. with petitioner in person.

versus STATE OF DELHI & ANR.

..... Respondents Through:

Mr. Amol Sinha, ASC for State with Mr. Kshitiz Garg & Mr. Ashvini Kumar, Advs. alongwith W/SI N.

Tiamenla, P.S. Geeta Colony.

Complainant in person.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT SHARMA

O R D E R

% 28.03.2024 1.

The present petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India read with Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeks quashing of FIR No. 70/2023, under Section 420 of the IPC, registered at P.S. Geeta Colony. 2.

During the pendency of the aforesaid proceedings, the matter has been amicably settled between the parties vide Settlement Deed dated 27.05.2023 and as per the said settlement deed, petitioner no.1 has agreed to pay an amount of Rs. 5,50,000/- to the respondent no.2. The copy of the aforesaid settlement deed dated 27.05.2023 is on record (Annexure P-2). 3.

In terms of the Settlement, an amount of Rs. 4,00,000/- has already been paid to respondent no.2 and the remaining amount of Rs. 1,50,000/- The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

has been paid to him in Court today, by means of a demand draft. 4.

Petitioner and complainant/respondent no. 2 are present before the Court and have been duly identified by the Investigating Officer, W/SI N. Tiamenla, P.S. Geeta Colony.

5.

A demand draft bearing no. 984294 dated 20.03.2024 for Rs. 1,50,000/- drawn on Union Bank of India has been handed over to the complainant/Respondent No.2, who acknowledges the receipt of the same. 6.

The complainant/respondent No.2 states that the matter has been settled with the petitioner and he has no objection if the FIR is quashed. He further states that all the terms of the agreement have been complied with. 7.

Learned ASC for the State submits that the investigation in the present case is ongoing. In view of the settlement between the parties, learned ASC for the State also has no objection if the present FIR is quashed.

8.

In Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, (2012) 10 SCC 303, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has recognized the need of amicable resolution of disputes by observing as under:- "61. ... In other words, the High Court must consider whether it would be unfair or contrary to the interest of justice to continue with the criminal proceedings or continuation of criminal proceedings would tantamount to abuse of process of law despite settlement and compromise between the victim and the wrongdoer and whether to secure the ends of justice, it is appropriate that criminal case is put to an end and if the answer to the above question(s) is in the affirmative, the High Court shall be well within its jurisdiction to quash the criminal proceeding."

9.

In view of the aforesaid circumstances, and the fact that the parties have put a quietus to the dispute, no useful purpose will be served in continuing with the present FIR No. 70/2023, under Section 420 of the IPC, The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

registered at P.S. Geeta Colony.

10.

In the interest of justice, the petition is allowed, and the FIR No. 70/2023, under Section 420 of the IPC, registered at P.S. Geeta Colony, is hereby quashed.

11.

Petition is allowed and disposed of accordingly. 12.

Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. AMIT SHARMA, J MARCH 28, 2024/nk Click here to check corrigendum, if any The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.