Rajender Singh v. State & ORS

$~18A&B.

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.A. 291/2014 RAJENDER SINGH Appellant Through :

Mr.Pradeep Kumar Arya, Mr.Rana Kunal, Mr.narinder Chaudhry, Mr.Siddhant Malik, Mr.Pankaj and Mr.Vijay Kumar, Advs. along with the appellant.

versus STATE & ORS Respondent Through ;

Mr.Feroz Khan Ghazi, APP for the State.

Mr.Ram Lai and Mr.Lalit Narayan Singh, Advs. for respondents no.2 and 3 along with respondents no.2 and 3.

+ CRL.A. 1612/2014 STATE GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI Appellant Through :

Mr.Feroz Khan Ghazi, APP for the State.

versus BALAK RAM & ANR.

Respondents Through :

Mr.Ram Lai and Mr.Lalit Narayan Singh, Advs. for respondents with respondents.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S.SISTANI HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL

ORDER

% 18.02.2015 1.

CRL.A.

291/2014 has been filed by the victim/injured CRL.A.1612/2014 has been filed by the State. Both these appeals are being disposed of by a common order as it is informed by counsel for the parties that the parties (injured and the accused persons) have arrived at an amicable settlement.

2.

As per the case of the prosecution a man, namely, Rajender Singh (appellant in CRL.A. 291/2014), was shot at Janta Flats in front of By:AMULYA

I ^ GTB Hospital, near Masjid.

The injured, Rajender Singh, is the husband of the sister of the accused persons, Sh.Balak Ram and Sh.Sanjay (respondents no.2 in CRL.A.

291/2014 respondents no.l in CRL.A.1612/2014).

DD No.llA was recorded at Police Station Dilshad Garden pursuant to which an FIR was lodged under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code read with Section of The Arms Act. The prosecution has examined witnesses.

Statement of respondents no.2 herein were recorded under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

The trial Court reached a conclusion that the prosecution has failed to prove its case under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code beyond reasonable doubt.

The trial Court, however, opined that the prosecution had been able to prove its case under Section 324 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

Respondent no.2, Balak Ram, was held guilty for the offence punishable under Sections 324/34 IPC read with Section 27 of the Arms Act.

3.

Learned counsel for the parties submit that having regard to the facts that the parties are close relations and with the intervention of elders friends the parties have entered into an amicable settlement with each other respondents no.2 have tendered an unconditional apology to the victim, Mr.Rajender Singh, the present appeals may be deposed of on the following agreed terms:

CRL.A. 291/2014 and CRL.A.16i2/2014 2/3

(i) respondents no.2 and 3 have tendered an unqualified apology to the victim, Mr.Rajender Singh.

(ii) To put a quietus to the matter, the parties to the present matters shall not press or institute any further litigation in any Court of law.

(iii) Respondents no.2 would not harass or harm Mr.Rajender Singh (appellant in CrI.A.No.291/2014) or his family members, in any manner whatsoever, in future.

(iv) Respondents no.2 and 3 have paid a sum of Rs.4.50 lakhs to Mr.Rajender Singh (appellant in CrI.A.No.291/2014) in Court towards full final settlement of all disputes and differences, which amount is duly acknowledged by the appellant.

4.

Accordingly, as prayed, both these appeals stand disposed of in ^ above agreed terms.

G.S.SISTANI, J RA SEHGAL, J SANGI FEBRUARY 18, 2015 msr CRL.A. 291/2014 and CRL.A.1612/2014 3/3