Kamre Alam v. The State & ANR.

$~20 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. 8280/2023 KAMRE ALAM ..... Petitioner Through:

Mr. Satish Kumar and Mr. Ravi Kumar, Advocates with petitioner in person.

versus THE STATE & ORS.

..... Respondent Through:

Mr. Sanjeev Sabharwal, APP for State with SI Avanish Kumar, P.S.

Jagatpuri.

Respondent No. 2 in person.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR OHRI

O R D E R

% 24.01.2024 1.

The present proceedings are instituted under Section 482 Cr.P.C. on behalf of the petitioners seeking quashing of FIR No. 0157/2022 registered under Sections 452/323/342/354/506/34 IPC and Sections 25/27 of the Arms Act at Police Station Jagat Puri, Delhi on the ground that the parties have amicably settled their disputes.

2.

As per the allegations levelled in the FIR, complainant has alleged that while he was in Karkardooma Court, the petitioner entered the complainant's house, pointed a pistol towards his child and misbehaved with his wife and also threatened her with dire consequences. 3.

Mr. Sabharwal, learned APP for the State, on instructions, submits that the petitioner is the only accused person and respondent No.2 is the only complainant/victim in the present case.

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the parties have settled their disputes before the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal in S.A. No. 561/2022 which is recorded in the order dated 20.12.2022. Subsequently, an Memorandum of Understanding/Compromise Deed was also entered between the parties on 24.08.2023. In terms of the said settlement, complainant is now left with no claim or grievance against the petitioner. 5.

The petitioner, who is present in Court, has been identified by his counsel as well as the I.O./ SI Avanish Kumar, P.S. Jagatpuri, Delhi. Respondent No. 2 is also present in Court and has been identified by the I.O. 6.

The petitioner has shown remorse for his conduct and undertakes not to repeat the same in future. Respondent No. 2 also states that he has entered into the aforementioned MOU out of his own free will, volition and without any coercion. He further states that he has no objection if the present FIR and consequent proceedings are quashed.

7.

The parties shall remain bound by the statements made in Court today.

8.

In view of the above facts and considering that no useful purpose will be served in continuance of the proceedings, it is directed that the aforesaid FIR and the consequent proceedings arising therefrom are hereby quashed, subject to payment of cost of Rs.5,000/- to be deposited with the Delhi State Legal Services Authority within a period of four weeks from today. The amount so deposited shall be utilized by the DSLSA for providing counselling/psychological support to POCSO victims requiring such assistance.

9.

Proof evidencing receipt of deposit shall be filed with the I.O. as well as in Court.

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

10.

A copy of this order be communicated to the Member Secretary, DSLSA for intimation.

11.

With the above directions, the petition is disposed of. 12.

In case the receipt of cost is not placed on record, the Registry shall list the matter before the Court.

MANOJ KUMAR OHRI, J JANUARY 24, 2024 ga The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.