Delhi High Court - Orders
Manoj Kumar And Ors vs State And Anr on 6 December, 2021
Author: Chandra Dhari Singh
Bench: Chandra Dhari Singh
$~20
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CRL.M.C. 2551/2021
MANOJ KUMAR AND ORS ..... Petitioners
Through: Mr. Lalit Sharma and Mr. Mohit
Goswami, Advocates
versus
STATE AND ANR ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Panna Lal Sharma, APP for State
along with SI Dharmendra Kumar,
P.S. Gokal Puri
Mr. Ashish Goswami, Advocate for
R-2
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA DHARI SINGH
ORDER
% 06.12.2021
1. The instant petition has been filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for quashing the FIR NO.125/2014 registered in Police Station Gokal Puri under Sections 323/341/354 Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as IPC).
2. Heard.
3. Issue notice. Notice accepted by Mr. Panna Lal Sharma, learned APP appearing on behalf of State.
4. Petitioners are present in Court and are identified by their counsel Mr. Lalit Sharma (Enrolment No. D-3628/2015). Respondent No.2 is also present in Court and identified by her counsel Mr. Ashish Goswami.
5. Petitioners and respondent No.2 have also been identified by the Signature Not Verified CRL.M.C. 2551/2021 Page 1 of 4 Digitally Signed By:DAMINI YADAV Signing Date:06.12.2021 17:38:20 Investigating Officer SI Dharmendra Kumar, Police Station Gokal Puri.
6. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of petitioners submitted that on 31st January, 2014, a quarrel took place between petitioners no. 1 to 3 and the respondent No. 2. On the complaint of Respondent No. 2, FIR No.125/2014 under Sections 323/341/354 IPC was registered at Police Station Gokal Puri.
7. It is further submitted that after completion of investigation, the prosecution has filed the charge sheet against the petitioners in FIR bearing FIR No. 125/2014 under Sections 323/341/354/354-A/34 IPC and petitioners are facing trial before the Court below.
8. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of petitioner submitted that the matter was referred to Mediation Centre Karkardooma Court by the Court below. In the course of mediation and conciliation, both the parties arrived at a compromise/ settlement on 21st May, 2019 which was reduced into writing before the Mediation Centre. The compromise/settlement deed between the parties before the Mediation Centre is appended as Annexure-3. All the parties i.e. petitioners no. 1 to 3 and respondent no. 2 have voluntarily and amicably settled all the disputes qua the present matter. Conditions are mentioned in paragraphs 1 to 4 in the settlement deed which is appended as Annexure-3.
9. On the query made by this Court, respondent No.2 has categorically stated that she has entered into compromise on her own free will and without any pressure. It is also stated by respondent No.2 that the entire dispute has been amicably settled between the parties.
10. Mr. Panna Lal Sharma, learned APP for the State submits that there is no opposition to the prayer made by the petitioner and respondent No.2 Signature Not Verified CRL.M.C. 2551/2021 Page 2 of 4 Digitally Signed By:DAMINI YADAV Signing Date:06.12.2021 17:38:20 seeking quashing of the FIR in question in view of the settlement arrived at between the parties.
11. Heard, learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
12. At this juncture, it is pertinent to refer to the law laid down in this context. In the case of B.S. Joshi & Ors. vs. State of Haryana & Ors 2003 (4) SCC 675, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that if for purpose of securing the ends of justice, quashing of FIR becomes necessary, Section 320 Cr.P.C. would not be a bar to the exercise of the power of quashing under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
13. Recently, a three judge bench of the Hon'ble Supreme Court while deciding the case of Ramgopal & Anr. vs. State of Madhya Pradesh 2021 SCC Online SC 834, has held that having regard to the nature of the offence and the fact that parties have amicably settled their dispute and the victim has willingly consented to the nullification of criminal proceedings, the High Court can quash such proceedings in exercise of its inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C., even if the offences are non-compoundable.
14. Applying the principle laid down in the aforementioned case laws, it is evident that the petitioner has invoked the provisions of Section 482 Cr.P.C. The instant criminal proceedings in respect of non-compoundable offences as alleged are private in nature and do not have serious impact on society and there is a settlement/compromise between victim and offender. It is settled law that High Court is also required to consider the conduct and antecedents of the accused as also to set out whether the accused persons have managed with the complainant to enter into the compromise. In the present case, the complainant is present and has categorically stated that she has entered into compromise and settled the entire disputes amicably with Signature Not Verified CRL.M.C. 2551/2021 Page 3 of 4 Digitally Signed By:DAMINI YADAV Signing Date:06.12.2021 17:38:20 the petitioner without any pressure or coercion. There is also no allegation from respondent No.2 that the conduct and antecedents of petitioner are bad towards her after the compromise.
14. Keeping in view the aforesaid facts and circumstances and also the law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court, FIR bearing No. 125/2014, registered at Police Station Gokal Puri for offences punishable under Section 323/341/354 of IPC and the criminal proceedings arising therefrom are quashed, subject to cost of Rs. 20,000/- to be deposited with Army Welfare Fund Battle Casualties, Account No. 90552010165915 with Syndicate Bank, within a period of three weeks from today.
15. After payment of cost, receipt shall be deposited with the Investigating Officer.
16. Accordingly, the petition stands disposed of.
CHANDRA DHARI SINGH, J DECEMBER 6, 2021 dy Signature Not Verified CRL.M.C. 2551/2021 Page 4 of 4 Digitally Signed By:DAMINI YADAV Signing Date:06.12.2021 17:38:20