Aditya Jain v. State & ANR.

$~7 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ CRL.M.C. 3147/2016 ADITYA JAIN ..... Petitioner Through Mr. A.K. Singh and Mr. Yash Pal Sapra, Advs.

with petitioner in person.

versus STATE & ANR.

..... Respondents Through : Ms. Meenakshi Chauhan, APP with ASI Baljit Singh, P.S.

Mianwali Nagar for respondent no. 1 Ms. Pragya Verma and Mr. D.B.

Yadav, Advs. with respondent no. 2 in person.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. PATHAK

O R D E R

% 04.08.2017 It is submitted that petitioner and respondent no. 2 have settled their disputes amicably before the Delhi Mediation Centre, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi on 29th July, 2016; therefore, FIR No. 628/2014 under Sections 279/337 IPC registered at Police Station Mianwali Nagar on the complaint of respondent no. 2, may be quashed. It is further informed that the offence under Section 338 IPC has already been permitted to be compounded by the trial court.

Respondent no. 2 is present in Court along with his counsel and has been identified by ASI Baljit Singh, P.S. Mianwali Nagar. Respondent no. 2 admits having settled the matter with the petitioner of his own free will and without any undue force, pressure or coercion. Respondent no. 2 says that he has already received `30,000/- from the petitioner in respect of the settlement proceedings. Clause (3) of the Settlement/Agreement dated 29th July, 2016 (Annexure - B) records that the settlement is without prejudice to the MACT claim of the respondent no. 2. Respondent no. 2 further submits that he is not willing to pursue the FIR any further and the same may be quashed.

Keeping in view the settlement arrived at between the petitioner and respondent no. 2 before the Mediation Centre, in the interest of justice, FIR No. 628/2014 under Section 279 IPC registered at Police Station Mianwali Nagar and the consequent trial arising therefrom are quashed. Petition is disposed of in the above terms. Dasti. A.K. PATHAK, J.

AUGUST 04, 2017 rb