Sumit Nanda v. State Of NCT Delhi & ANR
$~73 *
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P. (CRL.) 666/2018 SUMIT NANDA ..... Petitioner Through Mr. Sanjeev Sahay, Adv.
versus STATE & ORS.
..... Respondents Through Ms. Sushila and Ms. Shikha Mehra, Advs. for Ms. Richa Kapoor, ASC with SI Pawan Kumar, P.S. Kalkaji Ms.
Manpreet Kaur, Adv.
for respondent no. 2 Ms.
Reena Gujral, Adv.
for respondent no. 3
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. PATHAK
O R D E R
% 28.05.2018 Respondent no. 2 is complainant; whereas petitioner is an accused in FIR no. 692/2016 under Sections 420/406 IPC registered at Police Station Kalkaji. Respondent no. 3 is neither complainant nor accused. She has paid money to respondent no. 2 on behalf of her son, that is, petitioner, in terms of the settlement arrived at by her on behalf of her son (petitioner) with the complainant (respondent no. 2).
Counsel for respondent no. 2 submits that entire settled amount has been paid.
On the last date of hearing, respondent no. 2 was present in
Court along with his counsel. Execution of MOU dated 24th February, 2018, inasmuch as payment of `24 lacs, out of settled amount of `35 lacs was admitted.
It was stated that balance amount of `11 lacs will be paid in the month of June, 2018. It is brought to the notice of this Court that `11 lacs has already been paid.
Counsel for respondent no. 2 submits that respondent no. 2 has no objection in case aforesaid FIR and the consequent proceedings emanating therefrom are quashed.
Keeping in mind the settlement arrived at between the petitioner and respondent no. 2 voluntarily, in my view, no fruitful purpose would be served to keep the criminal proceedings pending. Accordingly, in the interest of justice, aforesaid FIR and the consequent proceedings emanating therefrom are quashed, in view of the settlement arrived at between the petitioner and respondent no. 2 and more particularly the fact that entire settled amount stands paid.
Petition is disposed of in the above terms. Dasti. A.K. PATHAK, J.
MAY 28, 2018 r.bararia