Delhi High Court - Orders
Sh. Om Prakash Soni S/O Shri Jeevan Ram, ... vs Unknown on 25 November, 2022
Author: Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav
Bench: Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav
1
$~37 & 38
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CRL.M.C. 6250/2022 & CRL.M.A. 24484/2022
SH. OM PRAKASH SONI
S/O SHRI JEEVAN RAM,
R/O HOUSE NO. 6A/19, W.E.A,
KAROL BAGH, NEW DELHI -110005. .... PETITIONER NO.1
SH. RAJ KAMAL SONI
S/O SHRI OM PRAKASH SONI,
R/O HOUSE NO. 6A/19, W.E.A,
KAROL BAGH, NEW DELHI -110005. .... PETITIONER NO.2
SH.NIRMAL SONI
S/O SHRI OM PRAKASH SONI,
R/O HOUSE NO. 6A/19, W.E.A,
KAROL BAGH, NEW DELHI -110005. .... PETITIONER NO.3
SH.RAM AVTAR SONI
S/O SHRI OM PRAKASH SONI,
R/O HOUSE NO. 6A/19, W.E.A,
KAROL BAGH, NEW DELHI -110005. .... PETITIONER NO.4
SH .VINOD SINGH,
S/O SHRI SURENDRA SINGH,
R/O VILLAGE BHOJAN, TEH. RAJGARH,
DISTT CHURU, RAJASTHAN - 331023. .... PETITIONER NO.5
SH.HARENDER JHA
S/O LATE TRIVENI JHA ,
R/O HOUSE NO A-370/6, KHADDA COLONY,
JAITPUR EXTENSION PART - 2, BADARPUR, DELHI - 110044.
.... PETITIONER NO.6
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:PRATIMA
Signing Date:02.12.2022
11:14:10
2
SH.BHIYA RAM
S/O SHRI GIRDHAR,
R/O HOUSE NO. WARD NO-10,
BEDHANOO, BIKANER, RAJASTHAN. .... PETITIONER NO.7
SH.HANSRAJ JAT
S/O SHRI RAMU RAM JAT
S/O AADSAR BASS, SHRI DUNGARGARH,
WARD NO-19, DISTRICT BIKANER,
RAJASTHAN - 331803. .... PETITIONER NO.8
Through: Mr.G.L.Soni and Mr.A.R. Regmi,
Advocates alongwith petitioners in person.
Versus
N.C.T OF DELHI,
THROUGH SHO, KAROL BAGH.
NEW DELHI-I ..... RESPONDENT NO.1
SH.RAJIV KHERA
S/O LATE HARI DUTTA KHERA
RIO HOUSE NO. 6A/27 (GROUND FLOOR),
W.E.A. NEAR CHANNA MARKET,
KAROL BAGH, NEW DELHI - 110005 ..... RESPONDENT NO.2
XXXXXXX
S/O XXXXXXXXX,
R/O XXXXXXXXXXXX ..... RESPONDENT NO.3
Through: Ms.Shubhi Gupta, APP for the State
along with SI Mohit Asiwal. PS Karol Bagh.
Mr.Birender Chaudhury, Advocate alongwith
Respondent Nos. 2 & 3 in person.
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:PRATIMA
Signing Date:02.12.2022
11:14:10
3
+ CRL.M.C. 6251/2022 &CRL.M.A. 24485/2022
SH.RAJIV KHERA
S/O LATE HARI DUTTA KHERA
RIO HOUSE NO. 6A/27 (GROUND FLOOR),
W.E.A. NEAR CHANNA MARKET,
KAROL BAGH, NEW DELHI - 110005 .... PETITIONER
Through: Mr.Birender Chaudhury,
Advocate alongwith petitioner in person.
Versus
STATE GOVT. N.C.T OF DELHI
THROUGH CONCERNED SHOPS KAROL BAGH
..... RESPONDENT NO.1
XXXXXXXXXXX
W/O XXXXXXXXXXXXX
R/O XXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXX ..... RESPONDENT NO.2
XXXXXXXXXXX
W/O XXXXXXXXXXXXX
R/O XXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXX ..... RESPONDENT NO.3
Through: Ms.Shubhi Gupta, APP for the
State along with SI Mohit Asiwal. PS Karol
Bagh.
Mr.G.L.Soni and Mr.A.R. Regmi,
Advocates alongwith respondent Nos. 2 & 3
in person.
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:PRATIMA
Signing Date:02.12.2022
11:14:10
4
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR
KAURAV
ORDER
% 25.11.2022
1. By way of the present petitions, the petitioners seek quashing of FIR No. 397/2018, under Sections 323/427/452/506/34 of the IPC and FIR No.439/2018, under Sections 354A/509/323 of the IPC both registered at Police Station Karol Bagh, Delhi, and the proceedings emanating therefrom.
2. The petitioners and respondent Nos. 2 & 3 are present in the Court and they have been identified by their respective counsel.
3. The facts of the case indicate that in both the cases, the parties are neighbours and on account of some minor altercation, the aforesaid FIRs were lodged.
4. During the pendency of the respective cases, the parties have realised that the entire dispute could be settled amicably. Accordingly, the matter was referred to the Delhi High Court Mediation and Conciliation Centre and the parties have readily agreed to put quietus to all criminal proceedings and entered into Memorandum of Understanding dated 30.08.2022.
5. Having considered the fact that the parties have entered into an amicable settlement, this court finds that the prayer can be accepted as the allegations are also not very serious so as to construe that the present is a heinous crime.
6. On the basis of various pronouncements of the Hon'ble Supreme Court including the decision in the cases of State of Madhya Pradesh v.
Signature Not Verified Signed By:PRATIMA Signing Date:02.12.2022 11:14:10 5Laxmi Narayan and Others1, B.S. Joshi & Ors. v. State of Haryana & Anr2., Gian Singh v. State of Punjab3 and Jitendra Raghuvanshi & Ors. v. Babita Raghuvanshi & Anr.4, it can be seen that the power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. for quashment of the criminal proceedings for non- compoundable offences can be exercised in cases having overwhelmingly and predominantly the civil character, particularly those arising out of commercial transactions or arising out of matrimonial relationship or family disputes and when the parties have resolved the entire dispute amongst themselves. The power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. should not be exercised in cases involving heinous and serious offences such as murder rape, dacoity etc., as such offences are not private in nature and have serious impact on society. The facts of each case had to be examined to arrive at a conclusion as to whether the same relates to private dispute or a crime against an individual or crime against the society. The courts normally should be slow in exercising power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. to quash FIR/criminal proceedings for the offences which are under the special statutes like Prevention of Corruption Act, POCSO, NDPS, UAPA, etc.
7. In view of the aforesaid, this court finds it appropriate to quash the FIR No. 397/2018, under Sections 323/427/452/506 and 34 of the IPC and FIR No.439/2018, under Sections 354A/509/323 of the IPC both registered at Police Station Karol Bagh, Delhi, and all proceedings emanating therefrom.
1(2019) 5 SCC 688 2 (2003) 4 SCC 675 3 (2012) 10 SCC 303 4 (2013) 4 SCC 58 Signature Not Verified Signed By:PRATIMA Signing Date:02.12.2022 11:14:10 6
8. The petitions are accordingly disposed of alongwith pending applications.
PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV, J NOVEMBER 25, 2022/MJ Signature Not Verified Signed By:PRATIMA Signing Date:02.12.2022 11:14:10