Sh. L. Santosh v. State Of NCT Delhi
$~11 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. 2829/2024 SH. L. SANTOSH ..... Petitioner Through:
Mr. M.K. Singh & Mr. Nagender Tomar & Mr. Arvind Kumar, Advs.
with petitioner in person.
Versus
STATE OF NCT DELHI ..... Respondent Through:
Mr. Hemant Mehla, APP for the State with Ms. Mridul Sharma, Advocate SI Vineet, P.S. Madhu Vihar.
Dr. Abhijeet Mishra, Adv. for complainant with complainant in person.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT SHARMA
O R D E R
% 16.05.2024 1.
The present petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeks quashing of FIR No. 500/2016, under Sections 279/338 of the IPC, registered at P.S. Madhu Vihar Delhi and all other consequential proceedings emanating therefrom, including the chargesheet pending before the court of Mr. Udbhav Kumar Jain, learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Karkardooma Court, Delhi.
2.
During the proceedings of the aforesaid proceedings, the parties have settled their dispute vide Settlement dated 09.12.2023 before Delhi Mediation Centre, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi. In pursuance of which, The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
respondent no.2 has no objection if the present FIR and consequential chargesheet is quashed.
3.
Petitioner and complainant/respondent no. 2 are present before the Court and have been duly identified by their respective counsel, as well as the Investigating Officer, SI Vineet, P.S. Madhu Vihar. 4.
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. 5.
In view of the settlement between the parties, learned APP for the State also has no objection if the present FIR is quashed. 6.
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."
7.
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. 500/2016, under Sections 279/338 of the IPC, registered at P.S. Madhu Vihar Delhi and all other consequential proceedings emanating therefrom, including the chargesheet pending before the court of Mr. Udbhav Kumar Jain, learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Karkardooma Court, Delhi.
8.
In the interest of justice, the petition is allowed, and the FIR No. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
500/2016, under Sections 279/338 of the IPC, registered at P.S. Madhu Vihar Delhi and all other consequential proceedings emanating therefrom, including the chargesheet pending before the court of Mr. Udbhav Kumar Jain, learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Karkardooma Court, Delhi, is hereby quashed subject to petitioner depositing a cost of Rs. 25,000/- with Delhi High Court Bar Association Employees Welfare Fund within a period of one week.
9.
Petition is allowed and disposed of accordingly. 10.
Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. AMIT SHARMA, J MAY 16, 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.