Pratik Jindal v. The State Govt Of NCT Of Delhi & ANR.

$~95 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. 3464/2024&CRL.M.As. 13315-16/2024 PRATIK JINDAL ..... Petitioner Through:

Mr. Sudeep Sudan, Advocate with petitioner in person.

versus THE STATE GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR ..... Respondents Through:

Mr. Nawal Kishore Jha, APP for State with SI Kailash Chand PS Sagarpur, New Delhi.

Mr. Sushil Kumar, Advocate for respondent No.2 with respondent No.2 in person.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR OHRI

O R D E R

% 02.05.2024 1.

The present proceedings are instituted under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking setting aside/quashing of the summoning order dated 17.11.2012, whereby petitioner has been summoned for offence punishable under Sections 384/506/34 IPC as well as the proceedings in CC.No.24952/2016 titled 'Mamta v. Anil Jindal & Ors.' filed by respondent No.2 under Section 200 read with Section 190 Cr.P.C and pending before learned MM-03, Patiala House Courts, Delhi on the basis of settlement dated 12.09.2022 arrived at between the parties.

2.

In the complaint, it was alleged that petitioner alongwith few others had been flouting the provision of Delhi School Education Act, 1973. However, vide the said summoning order, only two accused namely Pratik The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

Jindal (petitioner herein) and Anil Jindal had been summoned. 3.

Mr. Nawal Kishore Jha, learned APP for the State, on instructions, submits that the petitioner is the accused and respondent No.2 is the complainant in the present case. It is further informed that during the course of proceedings before the learned trial court, the other summoned accused namely Anil Jindal had expired and proceedings were abated against him vide order dated 10.08.2018.

4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that disputes forming the basis of the complaint have been amicably settled vide Settlement Deed dated 12.09.2022. He states that all payments have been made in terms of the settlement and in terms thereof, complainant is now left with no claim or grievance against the petitioner.

5.

The petitioner and respondent No.2, who are present in Court have been identified by their respective counsel as well as the I.O./SI Kailash Chand PS Sagarpur, New Delhi.

6.

Respondent No. 2 states that she has entered into the aforementioned settlement out of her own free will, volition and without any coercion. She further states that she has no objection if the present complaint case and consequent proceedings are quashed.

7.

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

8.

In view of the above facts and considering that no useful purpose will be served in continuance of the proceedings, the proceedings arising out of CC No. 24952/2016 are hereby quashed. As a necessary sequitur, the summoning order dated 17.11.2012 is also set aside. 9.

With the above directions, the petition is disposed of alongwith The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

miscellaneous applications.

MANOJ KUMAR OHRI, J MAY 2, 2024/rd The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.