Sanjay Kumar & Anr v. State NCT of Delhi & Ors

ORDER

30.05.2013 Crl.M.A. No. 8098/2013 (Exemption) in Crl. M.C. No. 2055/2013 Crl.M.A. No. 8928/2013 (Exemption) in Crl. M.C. No. 232112013 Exemption allowed subject to all just exceptions. Both the applications are disposed of. -, e Crl. M.C. No. 2055/2013 & Crl.M.A.No. 8099/2013 (stay) Crl. M.C. No. 232112013 & Crl.M.A.No. 8929/2013 (Stay) By the above captioned petitions filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., petitioners have registered cross-FIRs against each other. Since both the petitions relate to an inter se dispute between them, therefore with the consent of the parties, the same are heard and disposed of together. In brief, petition being Crl. M.C.No. 2055/2013 is filed under Section 482 of Cr. P.C. for seeking quashing of FIR No.296/2010, under Section 324/34 of IPC, registered at Police Station Ambedkar Nagar, New Delhi, while Crl. M.C.No. 2321/2013 is filed under Section 482 of Cr. P.C., for seeking quashing of FIR No.297/2010, under Section 324/326of IPC, registered at Police Station Ambedkar Nagar, New Delhi. Notice. ' Mr. Nitin Rai Sharma, Advocate appears on behalf of Ajay Sood @ Bunty in Crl. M.C.No. 232112013, whereas petitioners in Crl. M.C.No. 2055/2013 are present in person. Learned counsel for Mr. Ajay Sood submits that both the parties have amicably settled their dispute with the intervention of elders and respectable persons of the society. Learned counsel for the petitioner also submits that both the parties are known to each other and are living in the same vicinity. ,, It is submitted that ihe scuffle had taken place between the parties at the spur of moment and both the parties had received injuries in the said scuffle and cross FIRs were lodged by both the parties against each other. Counsel also submits that both the parties have now agreed to support the quashi11g uf their cross FIRs and to end hostility against each other. Counsel also submits that both the part.ies undertake not to indulge themselves in such type of criminal act in future. Counsel for the parties submit that in view of the said settlement arrived. at between the parties, now no dispute survives and both -r-, __ 1' the parties undertake not to indulge in any kind of criminal activity in future. Parties are present in court. Investigating Officer of this case is also present and has identified the complainants to the respective FIRs. Mr. Navin Sharma, Additional Public Prosecutor for State accepts notice of both these petitions and strongly opposes quashing of the FIRs in question. However, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for State submits that if this Court is inclined to quash the present FIRs, then the petitioners of both the petitions be directed to pay heavy costs for utilising the state machinery in vain. I have heard counsel for the parties, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State and also perused the documents placed on record. ' ·• . Considering the fact that the parties have amicably resolved all their inter se disputes, and the fact that they are known to each other and living in the same vicinity, this Court is inclined to quash the aforesaid FIRs i.e., FIR No. 296/2010 & FIR No. 297/2010 as no useful purpose would be served in keeping the said FIRs and the proceedings arising therefrom alive any further, subject to in both the petitions depositing a sum of Rs.15,000/- each with the Delhi Bar Association, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi; within a period of four weeks. Accordingly, subject to payment of Rs.15,000/- by each of the petitioners, FIR No. 296/2010, under Section 324/34 of IPC, registered at Police Station Ambedkar Nagar, New Delhi, and FIR No.297/2010, under Section 324/326of IPC, registered at Police Station .,.\mbedkar Nagar, New Delhi and the criminal proceedings arising therefrom, are hereby quashed ....... . With aforesaid observations, both the above captioned petitions stand disposed of. Dasti. MAY 30,2013 pkb J

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. 2055/2013 SANJA Y KUMAR & ANR. ..... Petitioner Through: In person. versus STATE NCT OF DELHI & ORS. . .... Respondent Through: Mr. Navin Sharma, Additional Public Prosecutor for the State with Sub- Inspector Randheer Kumar, Police Station Ambedkar Nagar, Delhi Mr. N itin Rai Sharma, Advocate for complainant/respondent No.2 + CRL.M.C. 2321/2013 AJA Y SOOD @ BUNTY STATE & ORS ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Nitin Rai Sharma, Advocate versus ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Navin Sharma, Additional Public Prosecutor for the State with Sub- Inspector Randheer Kumar, Police Station Ambedkar Nagar, Delhi Complainants in person. Certify that the digital and physical file have been compared and the digital data is as per the physical file and no page is missing. 0/o CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH GAMBHIR