Manoj v. State Of NCT Of Delhi & ANR.

$~39 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. 10178/2024 MANOJ .....Petitioner Through:

Mr. Ashutosh Kaushik, Advocate versus STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR.

.....Respondents Through:

Mr. Utkarsh, APP for State with SI Paramjeet, PS Ranhola, Delhi Respondent No. 2 in person.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS MAHAJAN

O R D E R

% 06.03.2025 1.

The present petition has been filed under Section 528 BNSS, 2023 seeking quashing of FIR No.

19/2018 under Sections 354/354A/354D/341/506 IPC registered at Police Station Ranhola, Delhi along with all other proceedings emanating therefrom on the ground that the parties have arrived at a settlement.

2.

Notice in the petition was issued vide order dated 23.12.2024. 3.

Learned APP appearing for the State submits that since the parties have arrived at a settlement they have no objection in case the present FIR is quashed.

4.

The petitioner as well as respondent no. 2 (complainant) are present in Court and they have been identified by the petitioner's counsel and also by the I.O/ SI Paramjeet Singh, Police Station Ranhola, Delhi. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

5.

The FIR was registered at the instance of respondent no. 2 wherein she alleged that the present petitioner had misbehaved with her. 6.

During the pendency of proceedings, the parties have arrived at a settlement, terms whereof were reduced in writing in the form of Settlement/Compromise Deed dated 18.07.2022, which is annexed as Annexure-P3 to the present petition.

7.

It is recorded in the settlement that the parties have arrived at a settlement voluntarily without any force, coercion or fraud. It is also a term of the settlement that respondent no. 2 will cooperate with the petitioner for quashing of the aforesaid FIR.

8.

Respondent no. 2 who is present in Court, on a query posed by the Court, affirms the factum of settlement and states that she has no objection in case the aforesaid FIR is quashed.

9.

At this stage, apt would it be to refer to the observations of the Supreme Court in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, (2012) 10 SCC 303: (SCC p. 340, para 58) "58. Where the High Court quashes a criminal proceeding having regard to the fact that the dispute between the offender and the victim has been settled although the offences are not compoundable, it does so as in its opinion, continuation of criminal proceedings will be an exercise in futility and justice in the case demands that the dispute between the parties is put to an end and peace is restored; securing the ends of justice being the ultimate guiding factor."

10.

In view of the settlement between the parties, the ultimate chances of conviction in the case are bleak, therefore, continuation of criminal proceedings will not serve any useful purpose and it will be an exercise in futility.

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

11.

It is, thus, in the interest of justice that the present FIR and all the other proceedings emanating therefrom be quashed.

12.

Consequently, the petition is allowed and the FIR No. 19/2018 under Sections 354/354A/354D/341/506 IPC registered at Police Station Ranhola, Delhi, alongwith all other proceedings emanating therefrom, is quashed along with the pending application.

13.

The petition stands disposed of in the above terms. VIKAS MAHAJAN, J MARCH 6, 2025 'rs'

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