← Library
High Court of DelhiCRL.M.C./6604/2022

Varun Solanki@Sonu Solanki v. State Of NCT Of Delhi & ANR.

2024-01-09Hon'Ble Mr. Justice Navin Chawla3 pages

$~46 & 47 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI (46)+ CRL.M.C. 6604/2022 VARUN SOLANKI@SONU SOLANKI ..... Petitioner Through:

Mr.Kanwar Udai Bhan Singh, Adv. with petitioner in person.

versus STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR.

..... Respondents Through:

Mr. Shoaib Haider, APP for State alongwith IO.

Mr.Keshav Sharma, Mr.Sarthak Yadav, Advs. for R-2 with R-2.

(47) CRL.M.C. 6619/2022 & CRL.M.A. 25801/2022 KRISHAN DABAS & ANR.

..... Petitioners Through:

Mr.Keshav Sharma, Mr.Sarthak Yadav, Advs. with petitioners.

versus STATE NCT OF DELHI & ANR.

..... Respondents Through:

Mr. Shoaib Haider, APP for State alongwith IO.

Mr.Kanwar Udai Bhan Singh, Adv. for R-2 with R-2 in person.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA

O R D E R

% 09.01.2024 1.

These petitions have been filed seeking quashing of the cross FIRs, that are, FIR No. 106/2018 registered at Police Station: Palam Village, New Delhi under Sections 354/509 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short, 'IPC') and FIR No.121/2019 registered at Police Station: Palam Village, New Delhi under Sections 354/323/34 of the The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

IPC.

2.

The learned counsels for the parties submit that the parties have resolved their disputes amicably and have entered into a Settlement Deed dated 11.10.2022 before the Mediation Centre Dwarka Courts, New Delhi.

3.

The complainants are personally present in Court and have been duly identified by the IO.

4.

Considering the above settlement between the parties and the chances of conviction of the petitioner(s)/accused persons being remote and bleak, in view of the principles enunciated by the Supreme Court in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, (2012) 10 SCC 303, Parbathai Aahir @ Parbatbhai Bimsinh Karmur & Ors. v. State of Gujarat & Ors., (2017) 9 SCC 641 and State of Haryana & Ors. v. Bhajan Lal & Ors. 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335, I find that no useful purpose would be served in continuing with the criminal proceedings as it would be an unnecessary burden on the State exchequer. 5.

Accordingly, the FIR No. 106/2018 registered at Police Station: Palam Village, New Delhi under Sections 354/509 of IPC, and the FIR No.121/2019 registered at Police Station: Palam Village, New Delhi under Sections 354/323/34 of the IPC, along with all other proceedings emanating therefrom, are quashed, subject to the condition that the petitioners in the respective petitions deposit costs of Rs.7,500/- each, with the Delhi State Legal Services Authority within a period of two weeks from today. The amount so deposited shall be utilised by the Delhi State Legal Services Authority for providing counselling/psychological support to the POCSO Victims The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

requiring such assistance.

6.

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

7.

The pending application stands disposed of as infructuous. 8.

The petitions are allowed in the above terms. NAVIN CHAWLA, J JANUARY 9, 2024/Arya/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.