High Court of DelhiCRL.M.C./1541/2017

Rajesh Kumar Singh v. The State & ANR.

2017-10-10Hon'Ble Mr. Justice A.K. Pathak2 pages

$~19 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ CRL.M.C. 1541/2017 RAJESH KUMAR SINGH ..... Petitioner Through Mr. Jaipal, Adv.

versus THE STATE & ANR.

..... Respondents Through Mr. Amit Gupta, APP with SI Dinesh Kumar, P.S. Ranhola for respondent no. 1 Respondent no. 2 in person

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. PATHAK

O R D E R

% 10.10.2017 Notice could not be issued to the respondent no. 2 as process fee was not filed. However, respondent no. 2 Smt. Lalita is present in Court and has been identified by SI Dinesh Kumar of Police Station, Ranhola. It is submitted that petitioner is brother-in-law of respondent no. 2. Petitioner and his wife had been taking care of the daughter of respondent no. 2 right from the childhood. Due to some misunderstanding, wife of petitioner took back the child to respondent no. 2 and told her that petitioner had beaten the child, consequently, present FIR No. 595/2016 under Section 323 IPC read with Sections 23 and 75 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection) of

Children Act, 2000 was registered at Police Station Ranhola. It is submitted that child is still in care and custody of the petitioner and his wife and is being looked after well. Respondent no. 2 says that FIR was lodged due to some misunderstanding.

Matter has now been resolved between the petitioner and respondent no. 2, vide a Settlement Deed dated 3rd April, 2017, therefore, FIR may be quashed.

Respondent no. 2 submits that petitioner is taking care of her child properly and she has no grievance against the petitioner now, therefore, FIR may be quashed. Keeping in mind the facts and circumstances, as detailed above, more particularly the fact that petitioner is bringing up the child for the last about eight years, in the interest of justice, FIR No. 595/2016 under Section 323 IPC read with Section 75 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection) of Children Act, 2000 registered at Police Station Ranhola and the consequent proceedings emanating therefrom are quashed, in view of the settlement. Petition is disposed of in the above terms. Dasti. A.K. PATHAK, J.

OCTOBER 10, 2017 r.bararia