Iktidar Ali @ Arif v. The State Of NCT Of Delhi & ANR.

2# $~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + IKTIDAR ALI @ ARIF ..... Petitioner Represented by:

Mr. Farahim Khan and Mr.

Nasimuddin, Advocates with petitioner in person.

versus THE STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR.

..... Respondents Represented by:

Ms. Meenakshi Chauhan, APP for the State with SI Shailendra K. Singh, PS Bhajanpura.

Mr. Pawan Bhatia, Advocate for respondent No.2 with respondent No.2 and her mother in person.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA

O R D E R

% 11.11.2016 By the present petition the petitioner seeks quashing of FIR No. 446/2008 under Sections 363/365 IPC registered at PS Bhajan Pura, Delhi on the complaint of Mohd. Saleem, brother of respondent No.2 Shanno, on the ground that the parties have settled the matter. Learned APP for the State on instructions submits that in the above noted FIR the petitioner is the only accused and the respondent No. 2 is the victim who was allegedly kidnapped and her brother, being the informant lodged the FIR.

The Respondent No. 2/the victim Ms. Shanno is present in Court. She

states that at the time of the incident she was a minor and her legal guardian was her mother, that is, Ishrat Jahan as her father had passed away. The FIR was lodged by the brother of the respondent No.2 as an informant because her father had passed away and her mother, the legal guardian Smt. Ishrat Jahan could not go to the Police Station to lodge the complaint. Respondent No.2, states that she is a major now and is now married. She further states that the informant who is her brother is residing separately out of Delhi and since the relations between the parties are not cordial, he has declined to appear in Court. Her mother Smt. Ishrat Jahan, who was the guardian of respondent No.2 till her minority is also present in Court. Both Smt. Ishrat Jahan and Ms. Shanno, respondent No.

2, who are present in Court state that they have settled the matter with the petitioner and do not wish to pursue the above noted FIR and the proceedings pursuant thereto. As per the decision of the Supreme Court reported as 2014 (1) SCC 87 Ganesh vs. Sharanappa and Anr. wherein the distinction between the complainant was noted, Mohd. Saleem was only an informant being neither the victim nor the legal guardian of the respondent No.2. Since the victim, that is, respondent No.2 and her legal guardian, her mother Smt. Ishrat Jahan, have settled the matter with the petitioner and the maker of the FIR Mohd. Saleem neither a victim nor the complainant was only an informant, being the brother of the respondent No.

2, this Court finds no legal impediment in quashing the FIR on the basis of settlement arrived at between the petitioner, the victim, the legal guardian of the victim, since at the time of the offence, the victim was a minor.

will be served in continuance of the trial, rather the same would be an abuse of the process of the Court.

Consequently, FIR No. 446/2008 under Sections 363/365 IPC registered at PS Bhajan Pura, Delhi and proceedings pursuant thereto are hereby quashed.

The petitioner, respondent No.2/the victim and her mother Smt. Ishrat Jahan, who are present in Court and are identified by their respective counsels and the Investigating officer, have signed this order sheet in acknowledgment of their statements made before this Court. The petition is disposed of. Order dasti.

MUKTA GUPTA, J.

NOVEMBER 11, 2016 'vn'