Full Text
Translation output
$-37& 39 HIGH COURT OF DELHI
CRL.M.C.677/2015
AMIT KUMAR &ORS
Through Petitioners Mr.H.P.Sharma,Adv.
CRL.M.C.677/2015
AMIT KUMAR &ORS
Through Petitioners Mr.H.P.Sharma,Adv.
VERSUS
STATE(NOT OF DELHI)&ORS Respondents
Through Mr.Ravi Nayak,APP forthe State along with SI N.Kumar,PS Swaroop
Nagar,in person.
Mr.Hirandra Kumar,Adv.with Mr.Diwan Singh,Adv.for R-2to 5.
Through Mr.Ravi Nayak,APP forthe State along with SI N.Kumar,PS Swaroop
Nagar,in person.
Mr.Hirandra Kumar,Adv.with Mr.Diwan Singh,Adv.for R-2to 5.
CRL.M.C.915/2015
MAHINDER SINGH & ORS
Through Petitioners Mr.Hirandra Kumar,Adv.with
Mr.Diwan Singh,Adv.
MAHINDER SINGH & ORS
Through Petitioners Mr.Hirandra Kumar,Adv.with
Mr.Diwan Singh,Adv.
VERSUS
STATE(NCT OF DELHI)& ORS Respondents
Through Mr.Ravi Nayak,APP forthe State along with SI N.Kumar,PS Swaroop
Nagar,in person.
Mr.H.P.Sharma,Adv.for R-2to 5.
Through Mr.Ravi Nayak,APP forthe State along with SI N.Kumar,PS Swaroop
Nagar,in person.
Mr.H.P.Sharma,Adv.for R-2to 5.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH
17.03.2015 Crl.M.A.No.2595/2015(exemption^in Crl.M.C.No.677/2015
Crl.M.A.No.3457/2015(exemptioniin Crl.M.C.No.915/2015
Exemption allowed,subjecttojustexceptions.
The applications are disposed of.
& 2015:DHC:10761 CrI.M.A.No.3458/2015 in Crl. M.C.No.915/2015
This is an application filed by the petitioners under Section 482
Cr.P.C.for condonation ofdelay of5 days in re-filing the present petition.
For the reasons stated in the application,the same is allowed and the delay in re-filing the petition is condoned.
The application is disposed of.
Crl. M.C.No.677/2015 & Crl.M.C.No.915/2015 These are two petitions under Section 482 Cr.P.C.; one filed by the petitioners, namely, Amit Kumar, Rameshwar Dayal, Sumit @ Sumit
Kumar Rawal and Smt.Mithlesh, and the other filed by the petitioners, namely,Mahinder Singh,Parveen,Kuldeep and Shakti,for quashing oftwo crossFIR Nos.320/2014 and 321/2014,both registered on 12^*"July,2014,at
P.S.Swaroop Nagar,Delhi.
Brieffacts ofthe case are that on 12'^ July,2014,a quarreltook place between the parties wherein both the sides allegedly suffered injuries. On the basis ofthe complaint made by Mahinder Singh(respondentNo.2in Crl.
M.C. No.677/2015), the FIR No.320/2014 was registered against the petitioners, i.e. Amit Kumar and others, under Sections 308/427/34 IPG.
Amit Kumar (respondent No.2 in Crl. M.C. No.915/2015) also made a complaint in respect ofthe same incident, on the basis of which the FIR
No.321/2014 was registered against the petitioners in the said petition,i.e.
MahinderSingh and others,under Section308/34IPG.
Sincethepartiesareneighbourers,subsequently,withtheintervention ofcommonfriends,relativesandtherespectablepersonsofthelocality,the parties have settled their disputes amicably by virtue of Compromise/
SettlementDeed dated 12^Januaiy,2015. The originaldeedisplaced on the record,which is duly signed bythe parties.
One of the petitioners, i.e. petitioner No.3 Sumit @ Sumit Kumar
Rawal in Crl. M.C. No.677/2015 and respondent No.4 in Crl. M.C.
No.915/2015 is not present. The other parties are present in Court and are duly identified by their respective counsel. They have confirmed the said settlement. Learned APP for the State has pointed out the specific allegations made in FIR No.320/2014 which attract the provisions under the
SC/ST Act. However,the complainant Mahinder Singh, who is present in
Court,states that due to oversight,such allegations were made.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, in order to maintain peace and harmony between the parties and in view of the averments made in the petitions as well as the settlement arrived at between the parties, the FIR Nos.320/2014 and 321/2014, both registered on 12^^
July,2014,at P.S. Swaroop Nagar,Delhi and proceedings pursuant thereto are hereby quashed qua the respective petitioners, subject to the condition that the petitioners and respondents No.2 to 5-in Crl. M.C. No.677/2015 shallfurnishtheirpersonal bondsofgood conductforaperiod ofone year.
Since the State machinery has been used, while quashing the FIR,I impose the cost ofRs.50,000/- each upon both sets ofthe petitioners in the abovesaidpetitions. Thepetitionersin Crl.M.C.No.677/2015shalldeposit the cost with the Delhi High Court Mediation and Conciliation Centre and the petitioners in Crl. M,C. No.915/2015 shall deposit the cost with the
Delhi Police Martyrs Fund, within four weeks from today. The original reoe^tsofdepositingthecostsshallbefiledbytherespectivepetitionersin heRegishywithinsix weeksandacopythereofbealsohandedovertothe
O. Incasethecostisnotdepositedbythepetitionerswithinthestipulated f i period,the matter shall be listed before Courtfor further directions.
The petitions are accordingly disposed of.
MARCH 17,2015/ka
17.03.2015 Crl.M.A.No.2595/2015(exemption^in Crl.M.C.No.677/2015
Crl.M.A.No.3457/2015(exemptioniin Crl.M.C.No.915/2015
Exemption allowed,subjecttojustexceptions.
The applications are disposed of.
& 2015:DHC:10761 CrI.M.A.No.3458/2015 in Crl. M.C.No.915/2015
This is an application filed by the petitioners under Section 482
Cr.P.C.for condonation ofdelay of5 days in re-filing the present petition.
For the reasons stated in the application,the same is allowed and the delay in re-filing the petition is condoned.
The application is disposed of.
Crl. M.C.No.677/2015 & Crl.M.C.No.915/2015 These are two petitions under Section 482 Cr.P.C.; one filed by the petitioners, namely, Amit Kumar, Rameshwar Dayal, Sumit @ Sumit
Kumar Rawal and Smt.Mithlesh, and the other filed by the petitioners, namely,Mahinder Singh,Parveen,Kuldeep and Shakti,for quashing oftwo crossFIR Nos.320/2014 and 321/2014,both registered on 12^*"July,2014,at
P.S.Swaroop Nagar,Delhi.
Brieffacts ofthe case are that on 12'^ July,2014,a quarreltook place between the parties wherein both the sides allegedly suffered injuries. On the basis ofthe complaint made by Mahinder Singh(respondentNo.2in Crl.
M.C. No.677/2015), the FIR No.320/2014 was registered against the petitioners, i.e. Amit Kumar and others, under Sections 308/427/34 IPG.
Amit Kumar (respondent No.2 in Crl. M.C. No.915/2015) also made a complaint in respect ofthe same incident, on the basis of which the FIR
No.321/2014 was registered against the petitioners in the said petition,i.e.
MahinderSingh and others,under Section308/34IPG.
Sincethepartiesareneighbourers,subsequently,withtheintervention ofcommonfriends,relativesandtherespectablepersonsofthelocality,the parties have settled their disputes amicably by virtue of Compromise/
SettlementDeed dated 12^Januaiy,2015. The originaldeedisplaced on the record,which is duly signed bythe parties.
One of the petitioners, i.e. petitioner No.3 Sumit @ Sumit Kumar
Rawal in Crl. M.C. No.677/2015 and respondent No.4 in Crl. M.C.
No.915/2015 is not present. The other parties are present in Court and are duly identified by their respective counsel. They have confirmed the said settlement. Learned APP for the State has pointed out the specific allegations made in FIR No.320/2014 which attract the provisions under the
SC/ST Act. However,the complainant Mahinder Singh, who is present in
Court,states that due to oversight,such allegations were made.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, in order to maintain peace and harmony between the parties and in view of the averments made in the petitions as well as the settlement arrived at between the parties, the FIR Nos.320/2014 and 321/2014, both registered on 12^^
July,2014,at P.S. Swaroop Nagar,Delhi and proceedings pursuant thereto are hereby quashed qua the respective petitioners, subject to the condition that the petitioners and respondents No.2 to 5-in Crl. M.C. No.677/2015 shallfurnishtheirpersonal bondsofgood conductforaperiod ofone year.
Since the State machinery has been used, while quashing the FIR,I impose the cost ofRs.50,000/- each upon both sets ofthe petitioners in the abovesaidpetitions. Thepetitionersin Crl.M.C.No.677/2015shalldeposit the cost with the Delhi High Court Mediation and Conciliation Centre and the petitioners in Crl. M,C. No.915/2015 shall deposit the cost with the
Delhi Police Martyrs Fund, within four weeks from today. The original reoe^tsofdepositingthecostsshallbefiledbytherespectivepetitionersin heRegishywithinsix weeksandacopythereofbealsohandedovertothe
O. Incasethecostisnotdepositedbythepetitionerswithinthestipulated f i period,the matter shall be listed before Courtfor further directions.
The petitions are accordingly disposed of.
MARCH 17,2015/ka
JUDGMENT