Dhairya Jain v. Govt. Of NCT Delhi And ANR
$~67 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(CRL) 3657/2024 & CRL. MA 35073/2024 DHAIRYA JAIN .....Petitioner Through:
Mr. Divij Soni, Advocate with petitioner in person.
versus GOVT. OF NCT DELHI AND ANR .....Respondents Through:
Mr. Sanjay Lao, Standing Counsel (Crl.) for the State with Mr. Abhinav Kumar Arya and Ms.
Priyam Agarwal, Advocates with SI Shubham PS Maurya Enclave, New Delhi.
Mr. Vishal Saxena, Advocate for respondent no.2 with SPA of respondent no.2 in person.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR OHRI
O R D E R
% 22.11.2024 1.
The present proceedings are instituted on behalf of the petitioner seeking quashing of FIR No. 0538/2024 registered under Sections 281/125(a) of BNS, 2023 at Police Station Maurya Enclave, New Delhi on the ground that the parties have amicably settled their disputes. 2.
As per the allegations levelled in the FIR, the petitioner's car hit respondent No.2, injuring the upper part of his legs. 3.
Mr. Sanjay Lao, Standing Counsel (Crl.) appearing for the State, on instructions, submits that the petitioner is the only accused and respondent No.2 is the complainant in the present case. He also submits that the petitioner be saddled with heavy costs, considering the nature of injury sustained by respondent No.2 and that the allegations are of serious nature as well as the fact that the State machinery has already been put in motion. 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 present FIR was registered due to a misunderstanding and with the intervention of family members and friends, the parties have amicably settled their disputes before Samadhan Delhi High Court Mediation & Conciliation Centre on 22.10.2024, a copy whereof has been placed on record. In terms of the said settlement, complainant/victim is now left with no claims or grievances against the petitioner. He further states that in terms of the settlement, the petitioners have paid an amount of Rs.2,10,000/- to the respondent No.2. 5.
The petitioner and AR of respondent No.2, who are present in Court, have been identified by their respective counsels as well as by the I.O./ SI Shubham PS Maurya Enclave, New Delhi.
6.
The AR of respondent No.2 states that respondent No.2 has entered into the aforementioned compromise out of his own free will, volition and without any coercion. She further states on his behalf 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.6,00,000/- over and above the already paid amount in terms of the aforesaid settlement, to be paid by the petitioner by way of demand draft to the respondent No. 2 within a period of four weeks from today. Proof evidencing payment of cost shall be filed with the I.O. 9.
With the above directions, the petition is disposed of along with pending application.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
10.
In case the proof of payment of cost is not filed within four weeks, the I.O. shall be at liberty to move an appropriate application in this regard. MANOJ KUMAR OHRI, J NOVEMBER 22, 2024/rd The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.