Rajesh Gupta v. Govt Of NCT Of Delhi & ORS
43#$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + RAJESH GUPTA ..... Petitioner Represented by:
Mr. Vikas Nagwan, Advocate with petitioner in person.
versus GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS ..... Respondents Represented by:
Mr. Sanjay Lao, Additional Standing Counsel for State with SI Dinesh Chandra, PS Keshav Puram.
Mr.Kamal Jindal, Advocate for respondent Nos. 2, 4, 5 and 6 with respondent Nos. 2 to 6 in person.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA
O R D E R
% 17.01.2018 By the present petition the petitioner seeks quashing of FIR No. 339/2017 under Sections 285/337/304A IPC registered at PS Keshav Puram, Delhi and the proceedings pursuant thereto on the ground that the family of the deceased and the petitioner have settled the matter. FIR No. 339/2017 was registered on the complaint of SI Dinesh Chander when fire broke in the premises of the petitioner and deceased Satyaveer Panchal, who was the neighbour of the petitioner came to help in extinguishing the fire as he was dealing in the business of fire extinguishers. Unfortunately during the said fire the oxygen gas cylinder installed at the premises blasted causing death of Satyaveer Panchal.
Learned Additional Standing Counsel for the State on instructions from Investigating Officer submits that in the above-noted FIR the petitioner is the only accused and the respondent Nos. 2, 4, 5 and 6 are the legal heirs of the deceased Satyaveer Panchal being his wife, son, daughter and the mother respectively all of whom are major. Respondent No. 3 is the son of the petitioner who got injured in the incident. Respondent Nos. 2 to 6 are present in Court and are identified by the learned counsel and the Investigating Officer. Respondent Nos. 2, 4, 5 and 6 states that they have settled the matter with the petitioner. A compensation of ₹5 lakhs has been paid vide Demand Draft No. 509221 dated 24th November, 2017 drawn on ICICI Bank, Lawrence Road, New Delhi to the family of the deceased, that is, respondent Nos. 2, 4, 5 and 6.
In terms of the settlement they do not wish to pursue the above-noted FIR and the proceedings pursuant thereto. Respondent No. 3 also does not wish to pursue the above noted FIR The petitioner who is present in Court and is identified by the learned counsel affirms the statement of respondent Nos.2 to 6. In view of the fact that the parties have amicably resolved their differences of their own free will, volition and without any coercion and no useful purpose will be served in continuance of the proceedings, it would be in the interest of justice to quash the abovementioned FIR and the proceedings pursuant thereto. There is no legal impediment in quashing the FIR in question.
Consequently, FIR No. 339/2017 under Sections 285/337/304A IPC registered at PS Keshav Puram, Delhi and proceedings pursuant thereto are hereby quashed.
Parties have signed this order sheet in acknowledgment of their statements made before this Court.
Petition is disposed of. Order dasti.
MUKTA GUPTA, J.
JANUARY 17, 2018 'vn'