Sachin John v. State (Govt Of NCT Of Delhi) & ANR
31#&4#$~ *
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CRL.M.C. 3877/2016 Petitioner Mr. Mohit Mathur, Sr.
Advocate with Mr. Vijay Nair, Mr. Rahul Malhotra and Mr.
Tanuj Arora, Advocates with petitioner in person.
MURALI KRISHNA PARNA Represented by;
versus THE STATE (GOVT., OF NCT OF DELHI) & ANR Respondents Represented by: Mr. Ravi Nayak, APP for the State with SI Deepak Kumar, PS Malviya Nagar.
Mr.Rajesh Kumar, Advocate for respondent No.2 with respondent No.2 in person.
+ CRL.M.C. 3550/2016 Petitioner Mr. Mohit Mathur, Sr. .
Advocate with Mr. Vijay Nair, Mr. Rahul Malhotra and Mr.
Tanuj Arora, Advocates with petitioner in person.
SACHIN JOHN Represented by:
versus STATE (GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI) & ANR ..... Respondents Represented by: Ms. Meenakshi Chauhan, APP for the State with SI Deepak Kumar, PS Malviya Nagar.
Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Advocate for respondent No.2 with respondent No.21n person.
CRL.M.C. 3877/2016 CRL.M.C. 3550/2016 Certify that the digital and physical file have been compared and the digital data is as per the physical file and no page is missing.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA
ORDER
% 20.10.2016 CrI. M.A. No. 16295/2016 (Exemption) in CRL.M.C. 3877/2016 Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
CRL.M.C. 3877/2016 and Crl. M.A. No. 16294/2016 (Stay) CRL.M.C. 3550/2016 and CrI. M.A. No.15016/2016 (stay) By the two petitions the petitioners Murali Krishna Pama and Sachin John seek quashing of FIR No. 1326/2014 under Sections 354/509 IPG registered at PS Malviya Nagar, New Delhi on the complaint of Respondent No.2 and the proceedings pursuant thereto on the ground that the parties have settled the matter.
Learned APP for the State on instructions points out that in the above noted FIR and the statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. Sachin John, Murali Krishna Pama and Rajeev Singh were named however, the charge sheet was filed keeping Sachin John in Column No. 11 and Murali Krishna Pama and Rajeev Singh in Column No. 12. The leamed Trial Court while taking cognizance summoned Murali Krishna Pama besides Sachin John. Thus Sachin John and Murali Krishna Pama are the two accused facing trial in the above noted FIR and respondent No. 2 is the only complainant/victim. The Respondent No. 2 who is present in Court and is identified by the leamed counsel and the Investigating Officer states that she has settled the matter with the Petitioners who have apologised to her and she does not want to pursue the abovementioned FIR and the proceedings pursuant thereto.
CRL.M.C. 3877/2016 & CRL.M.C. 3550/2016
Petitioners who are present in Court and are identified by the learned counsels affirm the statement of respondent No.2 and tender their unqualified apology besides assuring that no such misbehaviour will take place with either the complainant or with anyone else and as a token of apology undertake to pay a cost of ?25,000/- each to the Juvenile Justice Fund.
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. 1326/2014 under Sections 354/509 IPC registered at PS Malviya Nagar, New Delhi and proceedings pursuant thereto are hereby quashed subject to the petitioners depositing a sum of ?25,000/- each with Juvenile Justice Fund maintained by the Registrar General of this Court within three week.
Parties have signed this order sheet in acknowledgment of their statements made before this Court.
The petition and the application are disposed of. Order dasti. MUKTA GUPTA, J.
OCTOBER 20, 2016/'vn'
CRLM.C. 3877/2016 CRL.M.C. 3550/2016 V fX X\i •f/ I;