Sonu v. State(NCT Of Delhi) & ORS.

$~45 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ CRL.M.C. 518/2018 SONU ..... Petitioner Through :

Mr Shretas Mehrotra, Advocate.

versus STATE(NCT OF DELHI) & ORS.

..... Respondents Through :

Ms Anita Abraham, Addl. PP for the State.

Mr Ajay Kumar, Advocate for R-3.

SI Praveen Kumar, PS Mandawali.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA

O R D E R

% 01.02.2018 Crl. M.A. 1901/2018(exemption) Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

CRL.M.C. 518/2018 & Crl. M.A. 1900/2018(stay) 1.

The petitioner seeks quashing of FIR No.64/2013 under Sections 452/354 IPC and Section 8 of the POCSO Act, 2012, Police Station Mandawali, Delhi.

2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner points out that at the time when the FIR was registered, i.e. on 29.01.2013, the complainant was over 19 years of age, even though in the FIR, it is stated that she is aged 15.

3.

It is contended that the fact that she was 19 is substantiated from her Aadhar Card and further from the fact that the petitioner is married to the younger sister of the complainant, who, at the time of marriage on 03.06.2013, was aged about 19 years, which would imply that the elder sister would be a major as on the date of the FIR. 4.

The parties have settled their disputes. Even in her statement recorded before the Trial Court as PW-1 on 11.01.2018, the complainant has not supported any of the allegations in the FIR with regard to commission of an offence under Section 354 IPC or Section 8 POCSO.

5.

Respondent No.3 is present in person in Court today and submits that she has settled with the petitioner and does not wish to press any charges.

6.

In view of the above and keeping in view of the fact that the parties have resolved their disputes amicably, there does not seem to be likelihood of any conviction and further respondent No.3 does not wish to press her charges, continuation of criminal proceedings will be an exercise in futility and justice in the case demands that the dispute between the parties is put to an end and peace is restored; securing the ends of justice being the ultimate guiding factor. It would be expedient to quash the subject FIR and the consequent proceedings emanating therefrom.

7.

Accordingly, FIR No.64/2013 under Sections 452/354 IPC and Section 8 of the POCSO Act, 2012, Police Station Mandawali, Delhi,

and the consequent proceedings emanating therefrom are hereby quashed.

8.

Order Dasti under signatures of Court Master. SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J FEBRUARY 01, 2018 'Sn'