W.P.(CRL)/3603/2023 of AMIT KUMAR Vs STATE GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI AND ANR.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI+ W.P.(CRL) 3603/2023

AMIT KUMAR

..... Petitioner

Through: Advocate (appearance not given) Petitioner in person. Petitioner in person.

versus

STATE GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI AND ANR. ..... Respondents

Through: Mr. Abhinav, Advocate for Mr. Sanjay Lao, Standing Counsel for the State. Sanjay Lao, Standing Counsel for the State.

Mr. Rishi Manchanda, Advocate for Ms. Dipansh Verma, Advocate for R-2 with R-2 in person. Mr. Mukesh Gupta, Standing Counsel for MCD. Ms. Dipansh Verma, Advocate for R-2 with R-2 in person. Mr. Mukesh Gupta, Standing Counsel for MCD.

Mr. Divy Chugh, Advocate for IGL.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJNISH BHATNAGAR

19.01.2024

1.The present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of FIR No.113/2023, under Section 285/337 of the Constitution of India, registered at Police Station-Kirti Nagar, Delhi, and all proceedings emanating therefrom.

2. On the complaint of respondent no.2, the aforesaid FIR was registered against the petitioner.

3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that during the pendency of the trial, with the intervention of mediation of common friends, and elder persons of the society, the parties have settled the matter amicably.

4. Petitioner and Respondent No. 2 also present in Court today and they have been identified by the IO. I have interacted with the parties and they submit that they have settled their disputes. Respondent No.2 admits that she has settled the matter amicably with the petitioner. He further submits that the settlement/compromise has taken place voluntarily, without any force, pressure or coercion. Respondent No.2 submits that nothing remains to be adjudicated further between them and he has no objection if the FIR in question is quashed.

5. During the course of the proceedings, learned Counsels for the MCD and the IGL were also summoned and were directed to file their response to the present petition.

6. Learned counsels for the MCD and the IGL have filed their respective replies and also submit that the petitioner has settled their claims. They further submit that the MCD and the IGL have no objection if the FIR in question is quashed.

7. Learned counsel appearing for the State also submits that in view of the settlement, the State has no objection if the FIR in question is quashed.

8. Keeping in view the above facts and circumstances, since the petitioner has settled the claims with the MCD and the IGL as stated by the learned counsels for the MCD and the IGL in their respective replies and the matter has also been amicably settled with the complainant, no useful purpose will be served by keeping the case pending. It will be nothing but abuse of the process of law. Consequently, this petition is allowed, subject to costs of ₹10,000/- to be deposited by the petitioner with the Delhi High Court Legal Services Committee within four weeks from today. Upon placing on record the proof of deposit of costs within two weeks thereafter

and handing over its copy to the Investigating Officer, FIR No.113/2023, under Section 285/337 of the Constitution of India, registered at Police Station-Kirti Nagar, Delhi, and all proceedings emanating therefrom shall stand quashed.

9. The present petition stands disposed of accordingly.

JANUARY 19, 2024/p

RAJNISH BHATNAGAR, J