Karan Malik & ORS v. State (Govt Of NCT Delhi) & ANR

8# $~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + KARAN MALIK & ORS ..... Petitioners Represented by:

Mr. Nitin Ahlawat, Advocate with petitioners in person.

versus STATE (GOVT OF NCT DELHI) & ANR ..... Respondent Represented by:

Ms. Nandita Rao, Additional Standing Counsel for the State with Ms. Mehul Jain, with SI Ravi Kumar, PS Sabzi Mandi.

Mr. Mukul Sharma, Advocate for respondent Nos. 2 and 3 with respondent Nos. 2 and 3in person.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA

O R D E R

% 14.09.2016 By the present petition the petitioners seek quashing of FIR No. 574/2014 under Sections 341/354/509/323/34 IPC registered at PS Subzi Mandi, Delhi on the complaint of Respondent No.2 and the proceedings pursuant thereto, on the ground that the parties have settled the matter. Learned Additional Standing Counsel for the State on instructions submits that in the above noted FIR the two petitioners are the only accused and besides respondent No.2, who is the complainant, her mother is also a victim who has not been impleaded as a party.

Learned counsel or the petitioners has placed an amended memo of parties impleading the respondent No.3 as party respondent, which is taken on record.

The Respondent Nos. 2 and 3, who are present in Court and are identified by the learned counsel and the Investigating Officer, state that they have settled the matter with the petitioners and in terms of the settlement between the parties they do not want to pursue the abovementioned FIR and the proceedings pursuant thereto. They also state that they will abide by the terms of the settlement, copy whereof is annexed at pages 49 to 50 of the paper-book.

Petitioners, who are also present in Court and are identified by the learned counsel affirm the statements made by the respondent Nos.2 and 3 and state that they would abide by the terms of the terms of the settlement. Memorandum of Understanding as noted above.

In view of the fact that the parties have amicably resolved their differences of their own free will, volition and without any coercion and no useful purpose will be served in continuance of the proceedings, rather the same would create further acrimony between them, it would be in the interest of justice to quash the abovementioned FIR and the proceedings pursuant thereto. There is no legal impediment in quashing the FIR in question.

Consequently, FIR No. 574/2014 under Sections 341/354/509/323/34 IPC registered at PS Subzi Mandi, Delhi and proceedings pursuant thereto are hereby quashed.

Parties have signed this order sheet in acknowledgment of their statements made before this Court.

The petition is disposed of. Order dasti.

MUKTA GUPTA, J.

SEPTEMBER 14, 2016 'vn'