Zahid & ORS v. State Of NCT Of Delhi & ORS

$15 & 43 * TN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. 2799/2017 IMRAN @ FAKIRA & ORS Through:

Petitioners Mr. Prakash Priyadarshi, Adv. along with petitioners in person.

versus STATE OF CNT OF DELHI & ORS .....Respondents Through: Ms. Meenakshi Dahiya, APP for State with SI Anuj Kumar, P.S. Mayur Vihar.

Mr. S.N. Gautam, Adv. for R-2 & 3 along with R-2 & R-3 in person.

CRL.M.C. 2796/2017 ZAHID & ORS .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Prakash Priyadarshi, Adv. Along with petitioners in person.

versus STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS .....Respondents Through: Mr. G.M. Farooqui, APP for State with SI Anuj Kumar, P.S. Mayur Vihar.

Mr. S.N. Gautam, Adv. for R-2 along with R-2 in person.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. PATHAK ¶

ORDER

% 11.09.2017 It is submitted that petitioners (accused persons) and private respondents (complainants/injured persons) have settled their disputes amicably, therefore, following two FIRs may be quashed :- FIR No. 337/12 under Sections 308/323/34 IPC registered at Police Station Mayur Vihar-I on the complaint of Tahir (Respondent no.2 in Cr!. M.C. 2799/20 17 and petitioner no. 2 in Cr1. M.C. 2796/20 17);

FIR No. 338/12 under Sections 308/323/34 IPC registered at Police Station Mayur Vihar-I on the complaint of Imran By:AMULYA

LI & Fakira (Respondent no. 2 in Cr1. M.C. 2796/2017 and Petitioner no. 1 in Cr1. M.C. 2799/20 17).

Respondent no. 3- Nasir in Cr1. M.C. 2799/2017 is 15 years old and is a minor, therefore, he is being represented through his father, namely, Mohd. Ayub, who is present in Court. Private respondents Tahir, Imran @ Fakira and Mohd. Ayub are present in Court along with their counsel besides other petitioners in both the petitions. They have been identified by SI Anuj Kumar of police station Mayur Vihar-I. They submit that they and petitioners are residing in the same locality and known to each other. A quarrel took place between them on some trivial issue which had led to registration of present FIRs. They have now settled their disputes with the petitioners amicably, therefore, they have no objection in quashing of the above FIRs.

Keeping in mind that a settlement has been arrived at between the I' petitioners and private respondents and the fact that private respondents do not wish to pursue the FIRs any further, in the interest of justice, both the abovenoted FIRs and the consequent proceedings emanating therefrom are quashed. Both the petitions are disposed of in the above terms. Miscellaneous applications are disposed of as infructuous.

Dasti.

A.K. 4tfakq J.

SEPTEMBER 119 2017 ga