Shubham Chhillar v. State and Ors.

Delhi High Court · 05 Sep 2023 · 2023:DHC:6986
Dinesh Kumar Sharma
CRL.M.C. 6415/2023
2023:DHC:6986
criminal petition_allowed

AI Summary

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 279, 337, and 338 IPC based on an amicable settlement between the parties and exercised its inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC.

Full Text
Translation output
CRL.M.C. 6415/2023
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
CRL.M.C. 6415/2023
SHUBHAM CHHILLAR ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Himanshu Saxena, Mr. Manish Singh, Advs with petitioner.
VERSUS
STATE AND ORS ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Digam Singh Dagar, APP and Insp. Shrichand, PS Timarpur.
Mr. Aditya Joshi, Adv. with respondents.
Date of Decision: 05.09.2023.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SHARMA
JUDGMENT
DINESH KUMAR SHARMA, J.
(Oral)
CRL.M.A. 24048/2023
Exemption allowed subject to all just exceptions.
Application stands disposed of.

1. The present petition has been filed seeking quashing of case FIR NO. 356/2022 under Sections 279/337/338 IPC registered at PS Timarpur.

2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the complainant was on a cycle in the vicinity of Lucknow Road Timarpur when a car allegedly VERMA bearing no. DL-1CN-4494 hit the complainant. Subsequently, the car parked on the side and the injured persons were taken to the hospital. This accident led to the FIR No. 356/2022 being lodged against the driver i.e. the petitioner herein.

3. Learned counsels submit that however, now due to intervention of well-wishers and other respectable persons of the society, the dispute has been amicably settled between both the parties and they have entered into a settlement agreement. The agreement is brought on record and is not reproduced herein for the sake of brevity as the same is written by hand and is in Hindi.

4. The parties are present and have been duly identified by the IO.

5. Respondent states that they have received the settlement amount by way of 2 demand drafts; DD No.316147 dated 28.08.2023 in the name of Imran amounting Rs. 7,000/-drawn from State Bank of India and DD No. 316148 dated 28.08.2023 in the name of Irfan Ahmad amounting to Rs. 23,000/- drawn from State Bank of India.

6. It has been repeatedly held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court and this court that when the chances of an ultimate conviction are bleak and, therefore, no useful purpose is likely to be served by allowing a criminal prosecution to continue, and where the court may be of the opinion that a settlement between the parties would lead to better relations between them, the court may exercise power under section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing the proceedings or the complaint or the FIR as the case may be.

7. Taking the facts and circumstances of the cases in totality, I consider that there would be no purpose of continuing with the proceedings and do not see any reason to reject the settlement.

8. Since the parties have arrived on a settlement, FIR No. 356/2022 under Sections 279/337/338 IPC registered at PS Timarpur and all the proceedings arising therefrom qua the present petitioners are quashed.

9. The petition along with other pending applications stands disposed of.

DINESH KUMAR SHARMA, J SEPTEMBER 5, 2023 VERMA