Anil Kumar and Ors. v. The State & Anr.

Delhi High Court · 14 May 2025 · 2025:DHC:3737

Ravinder Dudeja

CRL.M.C. 2087/2025

2025:DHC:3737

criminal petition_allowed Significant

AI Summary

The Delhi High Court quashed a 2013 FIR under Sections 328, 506, and 34 IPC following an amicable settlement between parties, emphasizing the Court's power under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 to end criminal proceedings where continuation would be unjust.

Full Text

CRL.M.C. 2087/2025
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Date of Decision: 14.05.2025

CRL.M.C. 2087/2025 & CRL M.A 9377/2025 EXEMPTION
ANIL KUMAR AND ORS. .....Petitioners
Through: Mr. Varun Thakur, Adv. along

WITH

petitioners in person.

VERSUS

THE STATE & ANR. … Respondents
Through: Mr. Hitesh Vali, APP for the State

WITH

SI Deepak Sahu, PS
Punjabi Bagh.
Mr. Raj Kumar, Mr. Atul Singh Rawat & Mr. Sancheet Sharma, Advs. for R-2

WITH

R-2 in person.

CORAM:-

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVINDER DUDEJA

JUDGMENT

(ORAL)
RAVINDER DUDEJA, J.

1. This petition under Section 528 of the BharatiyaNagarikSurakshaSanhita, 2023 seeks quashing of FIR NO. 370/2013 dated 05.09.2013 under Sections 328/506/34 IPC, P.S. Punjabi Bagh, Delhi, and all proceedings arising therefrom pursuant to a settlement between the parties.

2. Respondent no. 2 married the petitioner’s daughter after she converted to Islam. He alleged that on being invited to the petitioner’s home on 24.10.2012, he was mentally harassed, which led to his hospitalization. He further claimed coercion and threats by the petitioner’s family, resulting in registration of FIR under Sections 328, 506, and 34 IPC.

3. During the proceedings, both parties entered into a Compromise/Settlement Deed dated 10.03.2024. The Compromise/Settlement Deed dated 10.03.2024 is annexed as Annexure-E.

4. Petitioners & respondent no.2 are physically present before the Court with respective Counsels. They have been identified by their respective counsels as well as by the Investigating Officer SI Deepak Sahu from PS Punjabi Bagh.

5. Respondent No. 2 submits that the matter has been amicably settled with the Petitioners without any force, fear, or coercion. He has no objection to the terms and conditions mentioned in the Compromise/Settlement Deed dated 10.03.2024 and further submits that he has no objection if FIR No. 370/2013 dated 05.09.2013 under Sections 328/506/34 IPC, P.S. Punjabi Bagh, Delhi, along with all pending proceedings arising therefrom, is quashed against the Petitioners. He further states that FIR No. 144/2013 under Section 498A/34 IPC, PS Shakarpur registered against him at the instance of daughter of the petitioner nos. 1 & 2 has since been quashed vide order dated 20.05.2015.

6. Ld. APP opposes the petition stating that offence alleged is of serious nature.

7. In Gian Singh vs State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303, Hon’ble Supreme Court has recognized the need of amicable resolution of disputes by observing as under:-

"61. In other words, the High Court must consider whether it would be unfair or contrary to the interest of justice to continue with the criminal proceedings or continuation of criminal proceedings would tantamount to abuse of process of law despite settlement and compromise between the victim and the wrongdoer and whether to secure the ends of justice, it is appropriate that criminal case is put to an end and if the answer to the above question(s) is in the affirmative, the High Court shall be well within its jurisdiction to quash the criminal proceedings."

8. FIR is of the year 2013, but till date charges have not been framed. In view of the aforesaid circumstances and the fact that parties have put a quietus to the dispute, no useful purpose will be served in continuing with the present FIR No. 370/2013 dated 05.09.2013 under Sections 328/506/34 IPC, P.S. Punjabi Bagh, Delhi and all the other consequential proceeding emanating therefrom.

9. In the interest of justice, the petition is allowed, and FIR NO. 370/2013 dated 05.09.2013 under Sections 328/506/34 IPC, P.S. Punjabi Bagh, Delhi, along with the all the other consequential proceeding emanating therefrom is hereby quashed, subject to cost of Rs. 20,000/- to be deposited by petitioners with Delhi High Court Legal Services Committee within a period of 15 days.

10. Petition is allowed and disposed of accordingly.

11. Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of.

RAVINDER DUDEJA, J MAY 14, 2025

Anil Kumar and Ors. v. The State & Anr.

AI Summary

Full Text

JUDGMENT

Contact Us for a Free Consultation