Mohd Anwar & ORS. v. State Government Of NCT Of Delhi And ANR

$~70 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 07.07.2025 + CRL.M.C. 4379/2025, CRL.M.A. 19037/2025 & CRL.M.A. 19038/2025 MOHD ANWAR & ORS.

.....Petitioners Through:

Mr. Baban Kumar Sharma, Advocate.

versus STATE GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI AND ANR .....Respondents Through:

Ms. Manjeet Arya, APP for State with SI Himanshu Kumar Dubey, PS Amar Colony.

CORAM: JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA J U D G M E N T (ORAL) 1.

Petitioners seek quashing of FIR No. 609/2016 of PS Amar Colony for offence under Section 384/308/34 IPC. The quashing is sought on the ground that the complainant de facto (respondent no.2) has compromised the disputes with the petitioners.

2.

According to the FIR, the petitioners assaulted respondent no.2 with sticks and iron rods, causing head injuries.

3.

At the outset, learned APP submits that the petitioners have concealed Page 1 of 3 pages Date: 2025.07.07 17:40:51 +05'30'

from this Court that earlier, a similar petition was filed by the petitioners and the same was registered as CRL.M.C. 5839/2023, and the same was dismissed by a coordinate bench of this Court vide order dated 15.03.2024 and the said order was upheld by the Supreme Court vide order dated 23.09.2024 in SLP(CRL) 10329/2024. Copies of both those orders are shown to me by learned APP.

4.

So far as the earlier petition CRL.M.C. 5839/2023 is concerned, copy of order dated 15.03.2024 has been placed on record of this petition. But there is complete silence on the part of the petitioners that even the Hon'ble Supreme Court refused to interfere with order dated 15.03.2024 of the coordinate bench of this Court. What to say of placing on record copy of order dated 23.09.2024 of the Supreme Court, petitioners did not even plead about dismissal of the said SLP. It is the respondent side, which has today disclosed about the Supreme Court order and shown me copy thereof. 5.

Petitioners have concealed that rejection of their petition to quash the said FIR has attained finality from the Supreme Court. Such efforts to hoodwink the Court must be dealt with sternly. 6.

The petition is dismissed with cost of Rs. 25,000/- to be deposited by the petitioners with DHCLSC within one week. Pending applications stand disposed of.

Page 2 of 3 pages Date: 2025.07.07 17:41:15 +05'30'

7.

At this stage, at request of learned counsel for petitioners, they are granted two weeks to deposit the costs. However to ensure compliance, copy of this order be sent to the concerned Trial Court. Date: 2025.07.07 17:41:33 +05'30'

GIRISH KATHPALIA (JUDGE) JULY 7, 2025/DR Page 3 of 3 pages