Delhi High Court - Orders
Mukhtar Ahmed & Anr vs State Govt. Nct Of Delhi & Ors on 22 February, 2023
$~67 & 69
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CRL.M.C. 1231/2023
MUKHTAR AHMED & ANR. ..... Petitioners
Through: Mr. Anurag Nasir & Mr. Paresh Bali,
Advs.
versus
STATE GOVT. NCT OF DELHI & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Pradeep Gahlot, APP for the State
Mr. I A Alvi and Mohd Adil, Advs. for
respondents. 2 to 4
+ CRL.M.C. 1241/2023
NASEEM AHMED & ORS. ..... Petitioners
Through: Mr. I A Alvi, Mohd Adil, Advs.
versus
STATE GOVT. NCT OF DELHI & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Pradeep Gahlot, APP for the State
SI Somlal Singh, PS Ranjit Nagar
Mr. Anurag Nasir & Mr. Paresh Bali,
Advs. for respondents 2 & 3
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANISH DAYAL
ORDER
% 22.02.2023 CRL.M.A. 4722/2023 in CRL.M.C. 1231/2023 & CRL.M.A. 4745/2023 in CRL.M.C. 1241/2023
1. Exemptions are allowed subject to all just exceptions.
2. Applications stand disposed of.
Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:MANISH KUMAR Signing Date:23.02.2023 10:20:48CRL.M.C. 1231/2023 & CRL.M.C. 1241/2023
1. These petitions have been filed for quashing of cross FIR Nos. 291/2014 and 292/2014 under various provisions inter alia including sections 323/307 /452/354D/34 IPC both registered at PS Ranjit Nagar.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners in both these petitions state that the petitioners are neighbours and the dispute was an off shoot of an altercation between them and injury was sustained by one of the complainants viz. Naseem Ahmed. It is submitted that the parties have settled their disputes way back in 2014 itself on the basis of which they were granted anticipatory bail in June, 2014. However, pursuant to filing of the charge sheet which involved charge under section 307 IPC as well, a further settlement has also been arrived at for quashing of these petitions. Copy of the settlement has also been filed on record as per which a sum of Rs.1,75,000/- has been paid to Naseem Ahmed as he had sustained injuries in the incident.
3. Ld. APP has however objected to quashing of the FIRs on the ground that grievous injuries involved. However, counsel for complainant Naseem Ahmed has relied upon the observation of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Narender Singh v. State of Punjab (2014) 6 SCC 466 "29.6. Offences under Section 307 IPC would fall in the category of heinous and serious offences and therefore are to be generally treated as crime against the society and not against the individual alone. However, the High Court would not rest its decision merely because there is a mention of Section 307 IPC in the FIR or the charge is framed under this provision. It would be open to the High Court to examine as to whether incorporation of Section 307 IPC is there for the sake of it or the prosecution has collected sufficient evidence, which if proved, would lead to Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:MANISH KUMAR Signing Date:23.02.2023 10:20:48 proving the charge under Section 307 IPC. For this purpose, it would be open to the High Court to go by the nature of injury sustained, whether such injury is inflicted on the vital/delicate parts of the body, nature of weapons used, etc. Medical report in respect of injuries suffered by the victim can generally be the guiding factor. On the basis of this prima facie analysis, the High Court can examine as to whether there is a strong possibility of conviction or the chances of conviction are remote and bleak. In the former case it can refuse to accept the settlement and quash the criminal proceedings whereas in the latter case it would be permissible for the High Court to accept the plea compounding the offence based on complete settlement between the parties. At this stage, the Court can also be swayed by the fact that the settlement between the parties is going to result in harmony between them which may improve their future relationship."
(emphasis added)
4. Accordingly, it is submitted that as per the MLC, the opinion of the doctor was that the injuries were sustained on the hand and could have been inflicted in attempt to save himself from a more serious injury.
5. Learned counsels for the parties submit that since there was no injury on the vital part of the body and the parties being neighbours have already resolved their disputes in 2014 itself, implication of section 307 IPC may not be made out.
6. All the parties in both the petitions are present in the Court and have been duly identified by the counsels and the IO. On query by this Court they have confirmed the factum of settlement amongst themselves and that they are now living in peace and harmony.
7. In view of above facts and circumstances, in considered view of this Court, the FIRs are being quashed subject and conditional on an undertaking Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:MANISH KUMAR Signing Date:23.02.2023 10:20:48 by the parties before the Court that they will not indulge in any criminal activity in future. Additionally, it would be appropriate that costs are imposed on the petitioners in CRL.M.C. 1231/2023 who had allegedly yielded a weapon. It is therefore directed that both the petitioners therein shall pay a sum of Rs.50,000/- each with Delhi Police Welfare Fund within 3 weeks from now.
8. Considering the above settlement between the parties and the chances of conviction of the petitioners being remote and bleak, there is no use continuing with proceedings of the present FIR as it would be a misuse of the process of the Court and an unnecessary burden on the State exchequer. Accordingly, the petition is allowed. Consequently, the FIR Nos. 291/2014 and 292/2014 both registered at PS Ranjit Nagar and proceedings emanating therefrom are quashed subject to payment of costs as directed above. An affidavit of compliance be filed by the petitioners on record of this Court with copy to the Ld. APP and the IO.
9. Parties shall abide by the terms of settlement.
10. Accordingly, the petition is disposed of. Pending applications (if any) are disposed of as infructuous.
11. Order be uploaded on the website of this Court.
ANISH DAYAL, J FEBRUARY 22, 2023/sm Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:MANISH KUMAR Signing Date:23.02.2023 10:20:48