Haridas @ Pandey And Others v. State And ORS.

$~23 & 24 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

(23) CRL.M.C. 3615/2022 RAMESH AND OTHERS ..... Petitioners Through:

Mr.Ashikesh Gupta, Adv. along with petitioners in person versus STATE AND ANOTHER ..... Respondents Through:

Mr.Shoaib Haider, APP with SI Manita R-2 in person.

(24)+ CRL.M.C. 3616/2022 HARIDAS @ PANDEY AND OTHERS ..... Petitioners Through:

Mr.Ashikesh Gupta, Adv. along with petitioners in person versus STATE AND ORS.

..... Respondents Through:

Mr.Shoaib Haider, APP with SI Manita R-2 & R-3 in person.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA

O R D E R

% 25.01.2024 1.

These petitions have been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short, 'Cr.P.C.') seeking quashing of FIR No. 1491/2017 registered at Police Station: Mangolpuri under Sections 324/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short, 'IPC') [CRL.M.C. 3615/2022] and FIR No. 1490/2017 registered at Police The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

Station: Mangolpuri under Sections 307/34 of the IPC [CRL.M.C. 3616/2022], along with all other proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of a settlement.

2.

The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the parties are neighbours and the subject cross FIRs were a consequence of a misunderstanding. He submits that the parties have resolved their inter se disputes and have entered into a settlement agreement dated 09.07.2022.

3.

The parties are present in person and have been duly identified by the Investigating Officer (IO). They reaffirm the abovementioned settlement and state that they have no objection to the FIRs and consequential proceedings being quashed by this Court. 4.

In view of the above, and considering the abovementioned Settlement arrived at between the parties, I find that no useful purpose will be served in continuing with the proceedings of the present FIRs as it would rather create further acrimony between the parties and would be an unnecessary burden on the State exchequer. Guided by the principles enunciated by the Supreme Court in its judgments in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, (2012) 10 SCC 303; Parbatbhai Aahir @ Parbatbhai Bhimsinhbhai Karmur & Ors. v. State of Gujarat & Ors. (2017) 9 SCC 641 and State of Haryana & Ors. v. Bhajan Lal & Ors. 1992 Supp (1) SCC 3, this Court deems it appropriate, in the interest of justice, to exercise its inherent powers under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. to quash the FIR and all the proceedings emanating therefrom.

5.

Accordingly, the petition is allowed. FIR No. 1491/2017 The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

registered at Police Station: Mangol Puri under Sections 324/34 of the IPC [CRL.M.C. 3615/2022] and FIR No. 1490/2017 registered at Police Station: Mangol Puri under Sections 307/34 of the IPC [CRL.M.C. 3616/2022] and all consequential proceedings emanating therefrom qua the petitioners are quashed, subject to the condition that the petitioners deposit costs of Rs.

40,000/- each in CRL.M.C.3615/2022 and CRL.M.C.3616/2022, with the Delhi State Legal Services Authority within a period of two weeks from today. The costs so deposited shall be utilised by the Delhi State Legal Services Authority for providing counselling/psychological support to the POCSO Victims requiring such assistance.

6.

The petitioners shall file, with the Registry of this Court, proof of deposit of the above costs and also supply a copy thereof to the concerned IO, within the aforementioned period. 7.

The petitions are disposed of in the above terms. NAVIN CHAWLA, J JANUARY 25, 2024/ns/AS 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.