Mukesh & ANR v. State

$~37 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ W.P.(CRL) 820/2015 MUKESH & ANR ..... Petitioners Through:

Mr. Jitender Solanki, Adv. along with petitioners in person.

versus STATE ..... Respondent Through:

Mr. Rajesh Mahajan, ASC with Ms.

Shinjan Jain, Adv.

Respondent no. 2 in person.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. PATHAK

O R D E R

% 22.04.2015 Learned Additional Standing Counsel submits that one juvenile, namely, Lalit, who has been referred as son of Ishwar in the FIR, is also involved in the matter.

However, he has not been made a party to the present petition. Respondent no.2 (complainant) is present in Court and submits that he has settled the matter with the petitioners. He further submits that he has no grievance against Lalit S/o Ishwar and does not want to pursue the FIR against any of them.

On the oral request made by the counsel for the petitioners, Lalit S/o Ishwar is impleaded as respondent no.

3. Let amended memo of parties be filed during course of the day. Petitioners and respondent no.2 are neighbours. Respondent no. 3 is also neighbour of respondent no.2 and petitioners. A perusal of FIR

indicates that a quarrel took place between petitioner no.2 and respondent no.2 on some trivial matter. It is further alleged that petitioner no. 2 gave beatings to respondent no.2 by baseball bat. Petitioner no.1, who is father of petitioner no.2, also scuffled with respondent no.2 and in the meantime respondent no. 3 also came at the spot and joined the petitioners in beating the respondent no.2.

Being neighbours petitioners and respondent no.2 have settled their disputes amicably in order to maintain harmonious relations in future. Terms of settlement have been recorded in the Memorandum of Understanding dated 19th March, 2015. Respondent no.2 confirms that he has settled the matter with the petitioners. He further submits that he has no grievance against respondent no.3 as well. He further submits that he is not willing to pursue the FIR any further and the same may be quashed. Keeping in mind that petitioners and respondent nos. 2 and 3 are neighbours and a quarrel took place between them on some trivial issue wherein petitioners caused simple injuries on the person of respondent no.2, inasmuch as, they have settled their disputes amicably in order to maintain harmonious relations in future, in my view, no fruitful purpose would be served in keeping the present FIR pending. Accordingly, FIR 65/2015 under

Sections 323/341/452/506/34 IPC registered at police station Dwarka Sector-23 and the consequent proceedings emanating therefrom are quashed. Writ petition is disposed of in the above terms. A.K. PATHAK, J.

APRIL 22, 2015 ga

W.P.(CRL) 552/2015 Statement of Shri Naveen Kumar Sharma S/o Late Shri Ram Kishor Sharma, aged 50 years R/o RCA-128 Hayat Nagar, Khora Colony, Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh - 201005.

On S.A.

I am father of Mrs. Bharti Sharma (petitioner no.1). I have come to know that my daughter has married Mr. Mrinal Deep Gupta (petitioner no.2) in Arya Samaj Mandir on 10th March, 2015.

Petitioner no.1 has married petitioner no.2 without our consent. Petitioner no.1 is major. I have accepted the marriage of petitioners and have no intention to cause any harm to them. I have given above statement without any force, coercion or pressure. RO&AC A.K. PATHAK, J.

APRIL 22, 2015 ga