Lavish Bhaskar v. The State Govt Of NCT Of Delhi & ANR

$~41 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. 5510/2017 & CRL.M.A. 21405/2017 LAVISH BHASKAR AND ANR.

..... Petitioners Through:

Mr. Amit Kumar, Adv.

versus THE STATE GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR .....

Respondent Through:

Mr. Sanjeev Sabharwal, APP for State with SI Prem Pal Singh, PS Bhajanpura.

R-2 in person

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE ANU MALHOTRA

O R D E R

% 22.12.2017 CRL.M.A. 21405/2017 (Exemption) Exemption allowed, subject to just exceptions. CRL.M.C. 5510/2017 Vide the present petition, the petitioner seeks quashing of FIR No.937/2015, registered at PS Bhajanpura, under Sections 324/341/506/34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 and all consequential proceedings emanating therefrom submitting to the effect that a settlement has been arrived at between the petitioner and the respondent no.2 in order to maintain cordial relations between them. The Investigating Officer of the case is present and has identified the petitioner no.1 Shri Lavish Bhaskar and the petitioner no.2 Bharat Bhushan Bhaskar as being the sole persons arrayed as

accused in the FIR No.937/2015 and has also identified the respondent No.2 present in the Court today as being the complainant of the said FIR. The petitioner nos. 1 & 2 and the respondent no.2 have produced their identify proof, photocopies of which are on the record as Ex. CW1/A, Ex. CW1/B and Ex. CW1/C respectively. The respondent no.2 on his examination on oath by the Court has affirmed his signatures on the affidavit annexed to the petition thereon at point-A & B on Ex.CW2/A and on the compromise deed/ settlement deed dated 08.12.2017 annexed with the petition at point A on each page thereon on Ex. CW2/B and stated that he has signed the same voluntarily of his own accord and without any duress, coercion or pressure from any quarter.

In view of the statement made by the respondent no.2, there is no reason to disbelieve his statement that he has so stated voluntarily of his own accord and without any duress, coercion or pressure from any quarter.

The respondent no.2 further stated that the petitioner no. 1 Lavish Bhaskar is his sister‟s husband and the petitioner no. 2 Bharat Bhushan Bhaskar is the father of petitioner no. 1. Learned APP for the State in the circumstances of the case does not oppose the prayer made by the petitioner seeking quashing of the FIR in question.

In view of the submissions made by the respondent No.2 duly identified by the Investigating Officer of the case and taking into account the compromise deed/ settlement deed dated 08.12.2017 which is placed on the record as Ex. CW2/B and taking into account

the factum that the petitioner no. 1 Lavish Bhaskar is the husband of the sister of the respondent no.2 and that the petitioner no. 2 Bharat Bhushan Bhaskar is the father of petitioner no. 1 and to maintain peace and harmony between the petitioner no.1 and the respondent no.2 and his sister with the petitioner, it is thus considered appropriate in the interest of justice that the prayer made by the petitioners seeking quashing of the FIR No.937/2015, registered at PS Bhajanpura, under Sections 324/341/506/34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 and all consequential proceedings emanating therefrom is allowed against the petitioner no.1 Lavish Bhaskar and the petitioner no.2 Bharat Bhushan Bhaskar, which is thus accordingly allowed, and the FIR No.937/2015, registered at PS Bhajanpura, under Sections 324/341/506/34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 and all consequential proceedings emanating therefrom against the petitioners are quashed. The petition is disposed of.

ANU MALHOTRA, J DECEMBER 22, 2017/vm