Naresh Khurana & ORS v. State Of Delhi & ANR
$~24 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.MC.4334/2017 NARESH KHURANA & ORS.
..... Petitioners Through:
Ms.Monika Singhal & Mr.Abhishek Gautam, Advocates. Petitioners in person.
versus STATE OF DELHI AND ANR.
..... Respondents Through:
Mr.Izhar Ahmad, APP for the State.
Mr.Kunal Sachdeva, Adv. for R-2.
Respondent No.2 in person.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATIBHA RANI
O R D E R
% 27.10.2017 1.
The petitioners have filed this petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. praying for quashing of FIR No.224 of 2015 registered under Sections 323/341/506 /34 IPC at PS Preet Vihar and all the proceedings emanating therefrom on the basis of settlement between the parties. 2.
Briefly stating the facts of the present case, are that respondent No.2 is the mother of petitioner No.1 and mother-in-law of petitioner No.2 & grand mother of petitioner No.3. On the basis of complaint by respondent No.2 the present FIR has been registered to the effect that when respondent No.2 along with her maid reached home, her daughter-in-law Anju Khurana started abusing her and threatened her. She started beating her. When her maid came to rescue her, Anju Khurana slapped her, pulled her hair and gave her beating. Her son Naresh Khurana also came and twisted the hand of her maid and caught her. The grand daughter of the respondent CRL.MC.4334/2017
No.2/complainant also came and abused her and her maid. When she raised alarm both of them were kicked and were pushed on the stairs. 3.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that due to certain family disputes and difference between the petitioners and the respondent No.2 about the family's property, they got involved in several litigations. 4.
Learned counsel for the petitioners further submit that during the pendency of proceedings in other litigations the parties were referred to Delhi High Court Mediation and Conciliation Centre and the parties arrived at an amicable settlement. A copy of the settlement agreement dated 1st June, 2017 is annexed with this petition as Annexure P-2. 5.
Respondent No.2 is present in person and submits that she has settled the matter with the petitioners and in terms of said settlement, the petitioners have bought a house for her as agreed in the settlement. Respondent No.2 further submits that she has no objection if the FIR in question is quashed qua the Petitioners.
6.
In view of the legal position laid down in Gian Singh v State of Punjab & Anr. 2012 (9) SCALE 257 and amicable settlement arrived at between the parties, I am of the considered view that no useful purpose would be served by continuing the criminal proceedings against the petitioners, which will only be an exercise in futile and wastage of precious ti me of the Court.
7.
Accordingly, in terms of the settlement, case FIR No.224 of 2015 registered under Sections 323/341/506 /34 IPC at PS Preet Vihar and consequential proceedings arising therefrom are hereby quashed. Order dasti, as prayed.
PRATIBHA RANI, J.
OCTOBER 27, 2017/'hkaur'
CRL.MC.4334/2017