NyayAI Legal Knowledge Graph โ€” Public Judgment & Act Pages (validation build, unlisted)

CRL.M.C./4443/2018 of BABLU KUMAR & ORS. Vs THE STATE (N.C.T. OF DELHI) & ANR.

Court
Delhi High Court
Decision date
2018-09-04
Bench
A K PATHAK
Case number
4443/2018

Parties

Cites (1)

Full text

solid underline = linked page · dashed underline = case is in our corpus, page not published yet · dotted red = recognized reference, not in our corpus

Show all Body

$-53/64

*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+CRL.M.C. 4443/2018 and Crl. M.A. no. 31201/2018

BABLU KUMAR & ORS.

Petitioners

Through Mr. Vijay Kumar, Adv.

versus

THE STATE (N.C.T. OF DELHI) & ANR. RespondentsThrough Ms. Aashaa Tiwari, APP with SIDevender Singh, P.S. Govind PuriRespondent no. 2 in person

AND

+CRL.M.C. 4397/2018 and Crl. M.A. no. 31007/2018

SUKHBIR & ORS. PetitionersThrough Mr. Vijay Kumar, Adv.

versus

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. PATHAK

ORDER%04.09.2018

By these petitions, petitioners have prayed for quashing of the

following cross FIRs:-

(a) FIR No. 183/2018 under Sections 323/341/354(B)/354/509/34 IPGregistered at P.S. Govind Puri on the complaint of Mr. Sukhbir @ Lala,respondent no. 2 in Crl. M.C. No. 4443/2018 and petitioner no. 1 in Crl.M.C.No. 4397/2018.

(b) FIR No. 179/2018 under Sections 452/323/509/506/34 IPG registeredat P.S. Govind Puri on the complaint of Mr. Bablu Kumar, respondent no. 2in Grl. M.G. No 4397/2018 and petitioner no. 1 in Grl. M.G. No. 4443/2018.Both the complainants, i.e., Mr. Sukhbir @ Lala and Mr. BabluKumar are present in Gourt and have been identified by SI Devender Singhof police station Govind Puri. They submit that they have settled thematter with the accused persons in their respective FIRs, vide GompromiseDeed dated August, 2018. They further submit that they do not wish topursue their respective FIRs, which are at the investigation stage and thesame may be quashed.

Keeping in mind the settlement arrived at between the petitioners andprivate respondents and the compromise entered into between them, in myview, no fruitful purpose would be served to keep the criminal proceedingspending. Accordingly, in the interest of justice, both the aforesaid FIRs,which are at the investigation stage, are quashed.

Petitions are disposed of in the above terms. Miscellaneousapplications are disposed of as infructuous. Dasti.

SEPTEMBER 04, 2018r.bararia

A.K. PATHAK, J.