High Court of DelhiCRL.REV.P./786/2017

Gautam Kumar Swain v. Aditya Nayak

2017-11-22Hon'Ble Ms. Justice Sangita Dhingra Sehgal3 pages

$~59 to 63 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.REV.P. 782/2017 & Crl.M.A.No.19295/2017 GAUTAM KUMAR SWAIN ..... Petitioner versus ADITYA NAYAK ..... Respondent + CRL.REV.P. 783/2017 & Crl.M.A.No.19294/2017 GAUTAM KUMAR SWAIN ..... Petitioner versus ADITYA NAYAK ..... Respondent + CRL.REV.P. 784/2017 & Crl.M.A.No.19296/2017 GAUTAM KUMAR SWAIN ..... Petitioner versus ADITYA NAYAK ..... Respondent + CRL.REV.P. 785/2017 & Crl.M.A.No.19290/2017 GAUTAM KUMAR SWAIN ..... Petitioner versus ADITYA NAYAK ..... Respondent + CRL.REV.P. 786/2017 & Crl.M.A.No.19289/2017 GAUTAM KUMAR SWAIN ..... Petitioner versus ADITYA NAYAK ..... Respondent

Present:

Mr. Ishan Jain and Mr. Hrishikesh Jha, Advocates for petitioner in CRL.REV.P. Nos.782/2017, 783/2017, 784/2017, 785/2017 & 786/2017. Mr. K.C. Nayak, Advocate for respondent in CRL.REV.P. Nos.782/2017, 783/2017, 784/2017, 785/2017 & 786/2017.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL

O R D E R

% 22.11.2017

The present Criminal Revision petitions have been filed by the petitioner challenging the judgment dated 11.10.2017 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Dwarka Courts, New Delhi in criminal appeal Nos.15/2016, 13/2016, 16/2016, 17/2016 & 14/2016 titled as "Gautam Kumar Swain vs Aditya Nayak" and order on sentence dated 17.03.2016 passed by Metropolitan Magistrate (NI Act), Dwarka Court, New Delhi in CC Nos.5494/2014, 5495/2014, 5499/2014, 5496/2014 & 5497/2014. Respondent is present in Court today and is identified by the learned counsel. He states that after the intervention of the family and friends, he has settled all his disputes amicably with the petitioner with his own free will and choice without any threat, pressure and coercion as per the Memorandum of Understanding dated 22.11.

2017 which has been filed today and he does not wish to pursue the abovementioned petitions and the proceedings pursuant thereto. Same is taken on record. Respondent further states that in terms of the MOU, he has received a Demand Draft of Rs.7,10,000/- (Seven Lacs Ten Thousand only) bearing No.945931 dated 15.11.2017 from the petitioner in Court today against all his claims. He undertakes to abide by the terms and conditions of the MOU. He further submits that he has no objection if the petitioner is acquitted in all the aforementioned cases.

Statements of the parties have been recorded separately. In view of the fact that the parties have amicably resolved their differences voluntarily out of their own free will and without any coercion, pressure, and no useful purpose will be served in continuance of the proceedings. It would be in the interest of justice to acquit the petitioner.

However, the petitioner is burdened with cost of Rs.7,500/- in each case to be deposited with the Delhi High Court Legal Services Committee. Cost deposited. Copy of receipt of Rs.7,500/- in each case has been placed on record.

The judgment assailed in the present revision petitions is set aside and the petitioner is acquitted of the charges levelled against him. The revision petitions are hereby allowed and disposed of in terms of the above.

Crl.M.(Bail) Nos.1830/2017, 1831/2017, 1832/2017, 1833/2017 & 1834/2017 In view of the aforesaid order, no order is required to be passed in the instant applications.

Dismissed as infructous.

Copy of this order be given dasti under the signatures of Court Master.

SANGITA DHINGRA SEHGAL, J NOVEMBER 22, 2017 afa