Neena Mahen v. State Of NCT Of Delhi & ANR.

$~79 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(CRL) 1453/2024 NEENA MAHEN ..... Petitioner Through:

Mr. Kartikay Yadav, Advocate alongwith petitioner in person.

versus STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR.

..... Respondents Through:

Mr. Yasir Rauf Ansari, ASC (Crl.) for the State with Mr. Alok Sharma & Mr. Vasu Agarwal, Advocates and SI Anil Kumar & HC Hansh Raj, P.S.

Delhi Cantt.

Mr. Kumar Gaurav, Advocate for R2.

R-2 in person (through Vc).

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT SHARMA

O R D E R

% 08.05.2024 CRL.M.A. 14153/2024 (Exemption) 1.

Exemption allowed, subject to just exceptions. 2.

The application is accordingly disposed of.

W.P.(CRL) 1453/2024 3.

The present petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. seeks quashing of FIR No. 018/2024, under Sections 279/337 of the IPC, registered at P.S. Delhi Cantt., Delhi. 4.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

during the pendency of the aforesaid proceedings, the parties have arrived at a settlement vide memorandum of understanding dated 02.05.2024 for a compensation amount of Rs. 1,20,000/- and the said compensation amount has already been paid to respondent no. 2.

5.

Petitioner is present in Court today and complainant/respondent no. 2 appears through video conferencing and have been duly identified by their respective counsel, as well as the Investigating Officer, SI Anil Kumar, P.S. Delhi Cantt.

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 and he has received the aforesaid compensation amount. 7.

Learned ASC for the State submits that investigation in the present FIR is pending and chargesheet is yet to be filed. 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 The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

have put a quietus to the dispute, no useful purpose will be served in continuing with the present FIR No. 018/2024, under Sections 279/337 of the IPC, registered at P.S. Delhi Cantt., Delhi. 10.

In the interest of justice, the petition is allowed, and the FIR No. 018/2024, under Sections 279/337 of the IPC, registered at P.S. Delhi Cantt., Delhi, is hereby quashed.

11.

Petition is allowed and disposed of accordingly. 12.

Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. AMIT SHARMA, J MAY 8, 2024/bsr 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.