Kamaljeet Singh v. State & ANR

$~5 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ CRL.M.C. 2094/2017 & CRL MA 8616/2017 KAMALJEET SINGH ..... Petitioner Through Mr. Sarfaraz Hussain, Adv with petitioner in person versus STATE & ANR ..... Respondents Through Mr. Amit Gupta, APP for State SI Sunil Chandra, PS Tilak Nagar Respondent No.2/Complainant in person

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. PATHAK

O R D E R

% 16.11.2017 FIR No.110/2002 under Sections 309 IPC and under Sections 27/54/59 of the Arms Act was registered against the petitioner at PS Tilak Nagar on the complaint of respondent no.2. As per FIR, respondent no.2 was in relationship with the petitioner. After their relationship broke up, petitioner continued to follow her and proposed to marry her. On 1st March, 2002 at about 5:45 PM petitioner came to her office with a knife in his hand and insisted that she should talk to her. Employer of the respondent no.2 namely Pradeep Kumar, who was present there told the petitioner to go away at which the petitioner waived the knife towards the respondent no.2 which hit her on her left arm and she sustained abrasions on her arm. Thereafter, petitioner

stabbed on his own thigh. Pradeep Kumar pushed the petitioner away as a result whereof petitioner fell down and knife slipped from his hand which was picked up by Sh.Pradeep Kumar. During the investigation sections 323/506 IPC have been added.

It is submitted that petitioner and respondent no.2 have settled their disputes before the Mediation Centre, Tis Hazari Courts on 11th March, 2016, therefore, aforesaid FIR may be quashed. Respondent no.2 is present in the Court and has been identified by SI Sunil Chandra of Police Station Tilak Nagar. Respondent no.2 says that she has settled the matter with the petitioner of her own free will, voluntarily and without any undue force, pressure or coercion. She further says that in view of the settlement, she is not willing to pursue aforementioned FIR against the petitioner and the same may be quashed.

Keeping in view the facts and circumstances as detailed herein above, and more particularly the fact that that petitioner and respondent no.2 have now settled their disputes amicably before the Mediation Centre, in my view, no fruitful purpose would be served to keep the criminal proceedings pending. Accordingly, in the interest of justice FIR No.110/2002 qua the petitioner and the consequent proceedings emanating therefrom are quashed.

Petition is disposed of in the above terms.

Miscellaneous application is disposed of as infructuous. Dasti. A.K. PATHAK, J

NOVEMBER 16, 2017/sm