CRL.M.C./4331/2011 of MOINUDDIN SABRI Vs STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS.

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ CRL.M.C. 4331/2011

Judgment delivered on : 22[nd] December, 2011

MOINUDDIN SABRI ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Vineet Malhotra, Adv.

versus

STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS. ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Navin Sharma, APP. Mr. Chetan Chawla, Adv. for R2 to R7.

CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT

SURESH KAIT, J. (Oral)

CRL. M.A. 19827-28/2011

Allowed subject to all just exceptions.

CRL. M.C. 4331/2011

1 Notice issued.

2 Mr. Navin Sharma, learned APP for State accepts notice on behalf of respondent No. 1

3 Mr. Chetan Chawla, Advocate accepts notice on behalf of respondents No.2 to 7.

4 Mr. Vineet Malhotra, learned counsel for the petitioner submits

Crl.M.C. 4331/2011 Page 1 of 3

that very unfortunate incidence took place on 27.11.2011 at about 2.15pm, when steam boiler bursted and due to which one precious life of poor worker namely, Aslam working there was lost and two other workers namely Pankaj and Azhar were injured. Due to said incidence, case FIR No. 399 dated 27.11.2011 was registered under Sections 287/337/304 Indian Penal Code, 1860 on complaint of R7/Pankaj at Police Station Hauz Khas, New Delhi.

5 Learned counsel for the parties have jointly submitted that the petitioner, the father and family of deceased and injured have settled the matter qua the aforesaid FIR on the following settlement.:- The petitioner has agreed to pay the compensation of:-

(i) Rs.5,25,000/- to the family of deceased.

(ii) Rs.2,000/- each to both the injured person.

6 Respondents No. 2 to 7 are personally present in the court today. They are duly identified by their counsel Mr. Chetan Chawla, Advocate. They all are satisfied with the amount received.

7 Learned APP for State submits that though the matter has been settled between the parties but keeping in view the fact that the petitioner is person of means, compensation amount may be enhanced as the above mentioned amount of compensation is too meagre.

8 I find force in the submissions made by learned APP for State. 9 At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner on instructions submits that petitioner is ready to further pay an amount of Rs.1lacs more to the family of deceased. In addition thereto, the petitioner is ready to provide employment to one of the brother of the deceased on

Crl.M.C. 4331/2011

Page 2 of 3

the salary last drawn by deceased.

10 Further submits that the petitioner shall pay Rs.25,000/- each to both the injured persons in addition to earlier settled amount of Rs.2,000/-. It is pointed out by learned counsel for the petitioner that both the injured are still working with the petitioner.

11 The petitioner has given Rs. 25,000/- each to both the injured persons namely Pankaj and Azhar in the court itself. They have accepted the same without any protest, rather they seem to be very happy.

12 The petitioner has undertaken to pay Rs.1lacs more to the family of deceased within week.

13 The proof of payment of Rs.1lacs in addition to the settled amount to the family of deceased shall be placed on record by the petitioner within week.

14 In the circumstances, if I do not allow the petition, it would be injustice to the family of the deceased. Therefore for the substantial justice it would be appropriate to quash the aforesaid FIR.

15 Keeping in view the above discussion into view and in the interest of justice, I quash the FIR No.399/2011 registered at P.S. Hauz Khas, New Delhi.

16 Accordingly, Criminal M.C. 4331/2011 is allowed.

17 Dasti to both the parties.

DECEMBER 22, 2011

SURESH KAIT, J

Page 3 of 3