Himanshu v. The State Gnct Of Delhi And ANR
$~81 *
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ HIMANSHU ..... Petitioner Through:
Mr. Ghanender Singh & Ms.
Yamini Sharma, Advocates alongwith Petitioner-in-Person (Through V.C.).
versus THE STATE GNCT OF DELHI AND ANR ..... Respondents Through:
Mr. Amol Sinha, ASCCRL for the State alongwith Inspector Kaushlesh Kumar Jha (P.S. Cyber Police Station, North-West District).
Ms.
Meghna Wadera, Advocate for Respondent No.2 alongwith R-2-inPerson (Through V.C.).
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT MAHAJAN
O R D E R
% 28.05.2024 CRL.M.A. 16678/2024 (exemption from filing certified copies of the annexures) 1.
Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions. 2.
The application stands disposed of.
3.
The present petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ('CrPC') seeking quashing of FIR The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
No. 30/2024 dated 27.04.2024, for offence under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 ('IPC'), registered at Police Station Cyber Police Station North-West District. The FIR was registered on a complaint given by Respondent No. 2. 4.
The allegations against the petitioner were that he has cheated and deceived the Respondent No. 2 and misappropriated the amount of Rs. 50,000/-.
5.
The present petition is filed on the ground that the parties have amicably settled all their disputes, by way of Memorandum of Understanding dated 03.05.2024, with the intervention of family, common friends, and well-wishers, on their own free will and without any coercion, fraud, or threat.
6.
It is submitted that the terms of the Memorandum of Understanding have been complied with, and the entire amount of ₹50,000/- already stands paid to Respondent No.2, as noted in the Memorandum of Understanding Deed dated 03.05.2024, signed by Respondent No.2 and Petitioner No.1. 7.
The parties are present in person in Court and have been duly identified by the Investigating Officer. 8.
Respondent No.2, on being asked, submits that all the disputes have been settled, and he does not have any objection if the proceedings arising out of the present FIR are quashed. 9.
Offence under Sections 420 of the IPC is compoundable. 10.
Keeping in view the nature of dispute and the fact that the parties have amicably entered into a settlement, this Court feels that no useful purpose would be served by relegating the parties to the Trial Court for filing an application to compound the offence. I am of the considered opinion that it is a fit case to exercise discretionary jurisdiction under Section 482 of the CrPC.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
11.
In view of the above, FIR No. 30/2024 and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom are quashed. 12.
The present petition is allowed in the aforesaid terms. AMIT MAHAJAN, J MAY 28, 2024 'Aman'
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.