Full Text
Translation output
$-45 & 46 HIGH COURT OF DELHI
CRL.M.C. 3878/2013
POQJA SAINI & ANR.
Through:
CRL.M.C. 3878/2013
POQJA SAINI & ANR.
Through:
VERSUS
STATE & ANR.
Through:
Through:
CRL.M.C. 3879/2013
PAWAN GUPTA & ORS.
Through:
PAWAN GUPTA & ORS.
Through:
VERSUS
STATE & ANR.
Through:
Petitioners Mr. Hamid Ali, Advocate Respondents
Mr. Mukesh Gupta, Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent-
State with SI Akhilesh Mr. Ranjan Kumar, Advocate for respondents No.2 to 4
Petitioners Mr. Ranjan Kumar, Advocate Respondents
Mr. Ravi Nayak, Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent-State with SI Mahavir Singh
Mr. Hamid Ali, Advocate for respondent No.2
Through:
Petitioners Mr. Hamid Ali, Advocate Respondents
Mr. Mukesh Gupta, Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent-
State with SI Akhilesh Mr. Ranjan Kumar, Advocate for respondents No.2 to 4
Petitioners Mr. Ranjan Kumar, Advocate Respondents
Mr. Ravi Nayak, Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent-State with SI Mahavir Singh
Mr. Hamid Ali, Advocate for respondent No.2
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR
16.09.2013 In respect ofincident of2"'^ August, 2013, FIR No. 207/2013 was registered at the instance of Ms. Pooja Saini, whereas a cross FIR No.
Crl M.C. No. 3878/2013 Crl. M.C. No. 3879/2013
Page 1 2013:DHC:7428 208/2013 was got registered by Ms. Annu Gupta at police station Kotla
Mubarakpur, New Delhi. Both these FIRs have been registered for ' commission ofoffences under Sections 323/509 ofthe IPG. ^
Notice.
Mr. Mukesh Gupta, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent-State accepts notice of petition [Crl. M.C. No. 3878/2013] and submits that Ms. Annu Gupta is present in the Court and she is identified to be the first-informant of FIR No. 208/2013 by SI Akhilesh
Kumar, Investigating Officer ofthis case.
Mr. Ravi Nayak, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent-State accepts notice of petition [Crl. M.C. No. 3879/2013] and submits that Ms. Pooja Saini is present in the Court and she is identified to be the first-informant of FIR No. 207/2013 by SI Mahavir
Singh, Investigating Officer ofthis case, Mr. Hamid Ali, Advocate, appears on behalf Ms. Pooja and has placed on record his Power ofAttorney/Vakalatnama, which is taken on record. Learned counsel submits that Ms. Pooja is present in the Court and she is the complainant/ first-informant of FIR No. 207/2013 [in Crl.
M.C. No. 3879/2013].
Mr. Ranjan Kumar, Advocate, appears on behalf of Annu Gupta, Pawan Gupta & Sandeep Gupta and has placed on record his Power of
Attorney/Vakalatnama, which is taken on record. Learned counsel submits that Ms. Annu Gupta is present in the Court and she is the complainant/ first-informant of FIR No. 208/2013 [in Crl. M.C. NO. 3878/2013].
Counsel for parties submit that parties to the afore-captioned two
Crl M.C. No. 3878/2013 Page2 4/ petitions are present in the Court and the incident in question took placej due to some misunderstanding, which now stands cleared in terms of settlement of 22"^ August, 2013 (Arfnexure-P-2) reached and now, no| dispute inter se parties survives and so, these proceedings be brought to an end.
Ms. Pooja Saini, who is the first-informant of FIR No. 207/2013
[in Crl. M.C. No. 3879/2013] has placed on record her affidavit of 16'^
September, 2013 stating that now the misunderstanding with petitioners stands cleared and she has no objection to the quashing of this FIR. Ms. Armu Gupta, who is the first-informant of FIR No. 208/2013 [in
Crl.M.C. No.3878/2013 ] has also placed on record her affidavit of 16^
September, 2013 stating that no disputewith petitioners survives and she has no objectionto the quashing of FIR in question. Ms. Pooja Saini and
Ms. Annu Gupta affirm contents of settlement of 22"^^ August, 2013
(Annexure-P-2).
In 'Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab' (2012) 10 SCC 303 Apex
Court has recognizedthe need of amicable resolution of disputes in cases like the instant one, by observing as under:-
16.09.2013 In respect ofincident of2"'^ August, 2013, FIR No. 207/2013 was registered at the instance of Ms. Pooja Saini, whereas a cross FIR No.
Crl M.C. No. 3878/2013 Crl. M.C. No. 3879/2013
Page 1 2013:DHC:7428 208/2013 was got registered by Ms. Annu Gupta at police station Kotla
Mubarakpur, New Delhi. Both these FIRs have been registered for ' commission ofoffences under Sections 323/509 ofthe IPG. ^
Notice.
Mr. Mukesh Gupta, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent-State accepts notice of petition [Crl. M.C. No. 3878/2013] and submits that Ms. Annu Gupta is present in the Court and she is identified to be the first-informant of FIR No. 208/2013 by SI Akhilesh
Kumar, Investigating Officer ofthis case.
Mr. Ravi Nayak, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent-State accepts notice of petition [Crl. M.C. No. 3879/2013] and submits that Ms. Pooja Saini is present in the Court and she is identified to be the first-informant of FIR No. 207/2013 by SI Mahavir
Singh, Investigating Officer ofthis case, Mr. Hamid Ali, Advocate, appears on behalf Ms. Pooja and has placed on record his Power ofAttorney/Vakalatnama, which is taken on record. Learned counsel submits that Ms. Pooja is present in the Court and she is the complainant/ first-informant of FIR No. 207/2013 [in Crl.
M.C. No. 3879/2013].
Mr. Ranjan Kumar, Advocate, appears on behalf of Annu Gupta, Pawan Gupta & Sandeep Gupta and has placed on record his Power of
Attorney/Vakalatnama, which is taken on record. Learned counsel submits that Ms. Annu Gupta is present in the Court and she is the complainant/ first-informant of FIR No. 208/2013 [in Crl. M.C. NO. 3878/2013].
Counsel for parties submit that parties to the afore-captioned two
Crl M.C. No. 3878/2013 Page2 4/ petitions are present in the Court and the incident in question took placej due to some misunderstanding, which now stands cleared in terms of settlement of 22"^ August, 2013 (Arfnexure-P-2) reached and now, no| dispute inter se parties survives and so, these proceedings be brought to an end.
Ms. Pooja Saini, who is the first-informant of FIR No. 207/2013
[in Crl. M.C. No. 3879/2013] has placed on record her affidavit of 16'^
September, 2013 stating that now the misunderstanding with petitioners stands cleared and she has no objection to the quashing of this FIR. Ms. Armu Gupta, who is the first-informant of FIR No. 208/2013 [in
Crl.M.C. No.3878/2013 ] has also placed on record her affidavit of 16^
September, 2013 stating that no disputewith petitioners survives and she has no objectionto the quashing of FIR in question. Ms. Pooja Saini and
Ms. Annu Gupta affirm contents of settlement of 22"^^ August, 2013
(Annexure-P-2).
In 'Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab' (2012) 10 SCC 303 Apex
Court has recognizedthe need of amicable resolution of disputes in cases like the instant one, 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 ofprocess of law despite settlementand compromise between the victim and the wrongdoer and whether to secure the ends ofjustice, it is appropriate that criminal I
n 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 ofprocess oflaw despite settlementand compromise between the victim and the wrongdoer and whether to secure the ends ofjustice, it is appropriate that criminal
I
Crl. M.C. No. 3878/2013 Page 3 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."
Since the misunderstanding, which led to the happening of the unfortunate incident in question, has been now cleared, therefore, to restore cordiality amongst them, it is deemed appropriate that proceedings pertaining to the two FIRs in question, be brought to an end as parties to these petitions are neighbours.
Resultantly, FIR No. 207/2013 [ in Crl. M.C. NO. 3879/2013] and FIR No. 208/2013 [in Crl. M.C. No.3878/2013] and proceedings emanating there-from are quashed qua petitioners subject to cost of ?10,000/- each to be deposited with the Prime
Minister's Relief Fund within two weeks. Receipt thereof be placed on record within a week thereafter.
The afore-captioned two petitions are accordingly disposed of.
SEPTEMBER 16,2013 r 5UNIL GAUR)
JUDGE
Crl.M.C. No.3878/2013 Page 4
I
Crl. M.C. No. 3878/2013 Page 3 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."
Since the misunderstanding, which led to the happening of the unfortunate incident in question, has been now cleared, therefore, to restore cordiality amongst them, it is deemed appropriate that proceedings pertaining to the two FIRs in question, be brought to an end as parties to these petitions are neighbours.
Resultantly, FIR No. 207/2013 [ in Crl. M.C. NO. 3879/2013] and FIR No. 208/2013 [in Crl. M.C. No.3878/2013] and proceedings emanating there-from are quashed qua petitioners subject to cost of ?10,000/- each to be deposited with the Prime
Minister's Relief Fund within two weeks. Receipt thereof be placed on record within a week thereafter.
The afore-captioned two petitions are accordingly disposed of.
SEPTEMBER 16,2013 r 5UNIL GAUR)
JUDGE
Crl.M.C. No.3878/2013 Page 4
JUDGMENT