Naseem And ORS. & ORS. v. State Of NCT Delhi And ORS. & ORS.
$~15 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. 6737/2022 & CRL.M.A. 26173/2022, CRL.M.A. 26174/2022 NASEEM AND ORS. & ORS.
..... Petitioners Through:
Mr.Ahmad Waseem, Adv.
versus STATE OF NCT DELHI AND ORS.
..... Respondents Through:
Mr.Aman Usman, APP with SI Ajit Krishna. Along with respondent nos.2 and 3 in person.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA
O R D E R
% 27.05.2024 1.
This petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short, 'Cr.P.C.') seeking quashing of FIR No.0201/2014 registered at Police Station: Gokulpuri, North-East District, Delhi under Sections 323/308/452/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short, 'IPC'), along with all other proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of a settlement. 2.
Issue notice.
3.
Notice is accepted by Mr.Aman Usman, learned APP and respondent nos.2 and 3, who appear in person. 4.
The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners and the respondent nos.2 and 3 are next door neighbours and the disputes arose out of some petty issues between the parties, which led to the registration of the aboveThe authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
mentioned FIR.
5.
The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the parties have amicably settled their inter se disputes and have entered into a settlement vide Settlement Agreement/Compromise dated 24.08.2022.
6.
The respondent nos.2 and 3 are present in person in Court and have been duly identified by the Investigating Officer (IO). They state that they have no objection if the present FIR is quashed, as it was a result of some misunderstanding between the parties which resulted in a sudden fight. They reaffirm the settlement and state that they have settled all the disputes with the petitioners of their own free will and without any coercion. 7.
On the other hand, the learned APP opposes the prayer made in the present petition as the allegations against the petitioners are grave in nature, including under Section 308 of the IPC. He submits that the injured had suffered an injury on his head. 8.
I have perused the contents of the FIR and also the settlement between the parties.
9.
In The State of Madhya Pradesh v. Laxmi Narayan, (2019) 5 SCC 688, the Supreme Court has laid down the parameters under which the High Courts shall exercise the power conferred under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C.. The Court held that, though the Courts must be slow in exercising their jurisdiction under Section 482 for quashing the proceedings arising out of offences punishable under Sections 307/308 IPC, the High Courts are not deprived of exercising the powers under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
in certain special circumstances. It was held that the Court shall weigh on the factors including the nature of injuries, stage of the proceedings, etc. It was held as under:
"15.4. Offences under Section 307 IPC and the Arms Act, etc. would fall in the category of heinous and serious offences and therefore are to be treated as crime against the society and not against the individual alone, and therefore, the criminal proceedings for the offence under Section 307 IPC and/or the Arms Act, etc.
which have a serious impact on the society cannot be quashed in exercise of powers under Section 482 of the Code, on the ground that the parties have resolved their entire dispute amongst themselves. However, the High Court would not rest its decision merely because there is a mention of Section 307 IPC in theFIR or the charge is framed under this provision. It would be open to the High Court to examine as to whether incorporation of Section 307 IPC is there for the sake of it or the prosecution has collected sufficient evidence, which if proved, would lead to framing the charge under Section 307 IPC.
For this purpose, it would be open to the High Court to go by the nature of injury sustained, whether such injury is inflicted on the vital/delicate parts of the body, nature of weapons used, etc. However, such an exercise by the High Court would be permissible only after the evidence is collected after investigation and the charge-sheet is filed/charge is framed and/or during the trial. Such exercise is not permissible when the matter is still under investigation. Therefore, the ultimate conclusion in paras 29.6 and 29.7 of the decision of this Court in Narinder Singh v. State of Punjab, (2014) 6 SCC 466 should be read harmoniously and to be read as a whole and in the circumstances stated hereinabove;"
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
No.2016:DHC:2419, a learned Single Judge of this Court has held as under:
"9. As discussed above, offence punishable under Section 308 IPC is not compoundable being of serious nature, however, if the Court feels that continuation of criminal proceedings will be an exercise in futility and justice in this case demands that the dispute between the parties is put to an end and peace is restored, it can order for quashing of the FIR or criminal proceedings as it is the duty of the Court to prevent continuation of unnecessary judicial process."
11. The above view was reiterated by this Court in Mahender Singh no.2021:DHC:978, while quashing an FIR filed under Section 308 of the IPC.
12. Keeping in view the fact that parties are neighbours and the respondent nos.2 and 3 do not wish to pursue their complaint any further, as also the Settlement arrived at between the parties, I find that no useful purpose shall be served in continuing with the proceedings of the present FIR as the chances of its success will be rather minuscule and it would create further acrimony between the parties and will be an unnecessary burden on the State exchequer.
13. Guided by the principles enunciated by the above referred judgments, this Court deems it appropriate, in the interest of justice, to exercise its inherent powers under Section 482 of the The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
Cr.P.C. to quash the FIR and all the proceedings emanating therefrom.
14. Accordingly, the petition is allowed. FIR No.0201/2014 registered at Police Station: Gokulpuri, North-East District, Delhi, under Sections 323/308/452/34 of the IPC and all consequential proceedings emanating therefrom against the petitioners are quashed, subject to the condition that the petitioners shall deposit costs of Rs.7,500/- each with the Delhi State Legal Services Authority within a period of four weeks from today, and file proof of such deposit with the Registry of this Court and also supply a copy thereof to the IO, within the said period.
15. The costs so deposited shall be utilized by the Delhi State Legal Services Authority for providing counselling/psychological support to the POCSO Victims requiring such assistance. NAVIN CHAWLA, J MAY 27, 2024 RN/ss 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.