Satish Kumar Rohilla v. The State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi)

1. The present petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr. PC seeking quashing of FIR No. 214/2016 dated 14.07.2016 registered at PS Baba Haridass Nagar, under section 287/304A of IPC along with consequential proceedings.

2. Briefly stated, the present FIR was registered on the statement of Mr. Pramod aged around 18 years. Complainant used to work at factory named Haryana tiles. On 14.07.2016, at about 10 AM he along with his partner namely Kailash (Deceased) and Santosh were working in the factory. The victim was working at the mixing machine where the complainant was putting in the cement and water in it. Santosh was putting in the cement. At about 11:30 a.m. Kailash (deceased) started rolling the machine and suddenly his hand slipped from the handle and he fell on the electric motor that was kept behind him to run the mixing machine. There were open electric wires in the electric motor. Upon falling, Kailash got electrocuted and fell unconscious. Thereafter the factory supervisor Ashish and factory worker Rajaram took Kailash (deceased) to RTRM Hospital Jaffarpur. Thereafter the victim succumbed to his injuries.

3. It is submitted that the charge sheet has already been filed by the IO against the Petitioner which is now pending before the court of Ld. MM, Dwarka Court, New Delhi.

4. Learned counsel submits that during the pendency of the proceedings, Petitioner has resolved the dispute with Respondent No.2 & 3 (who are the parents of the deceased) in the interest of the welfare of family members and a written settlement deed had been executed between the petitioner and the respondent no. 02 and 03 on 11.10.2021 on the following terms and conditions:

1. That the first party shall pay total amount of Rs.2,50,000/- (Rupees Two lacs Fifty thousand only) on 11.11.2021 to the second party towards the full and final settlement i.e. cheque no.000028 amount of Rs.2,50,000/-.

2. That after receiving the aforesaid amount of Rs.2,50,000/- (Rupees Two lacs Fifty thousand only) on 11.11.2021 and the second party shall withdraw both the abovementioned cases against the first party after the receipt of the abovesaid settlement amount. Now there are no disputes left between the parties to this M.O.U.

3. That both of the Parties have settled their disputes and issues had have left with no grudge against each other and have willingly decided to withdraw the above mentioned two cases by moving appropriate application/conciliation/withdrawal before the concerned Court.

4. That it is further agreed that the parties will not initiate any criminal complaint/petition or civil proceedings against each other in future for dispute between them.

5. That after aforesaid payment of 2, 50,000/- (Rupees Two lacs Fifty thousand only), nothing shall remain payable to the second party on account of the first party.

6. That the terms and conditions of this M.O. U. shall be binding on both of the Parties to this M.O.U. dated 11.10.2021.

5. The petitioner and respondent Nos. 2 and 3 (Parents of the deceased victim) are present in person and have been duly identified by the IO. It is submitted that Rs. 70,000/- have already been paid to the respondents and today a D.D. no. 905114, dated 04.09.2023 in the sum of Rs. 2,50,000/- (Rupees Two lakh and fifty thousand) drawn on Punjab National Bank, Delhi Road, Bahadurgarh in the name of Reshmu Devi i.e., Respondent no. 3 has been handed over in court to the respondents.

6. Respondents state that they have entered into the settlement voluntarily out of their own free will, without any fear, force, or coercion. They further state that they have received the entire settled amount and have no objection if the present FIR and all criminal proceedings emanating therefrom are quashed.

7. Since the matter has been settled between the parties vide settlement agreement dated 11.10.2021, and Further, in terms of the settlement agreement, the respondent has already received the entire settled amount.

8. I consider that continuance of the present FIR would serve no useful purpose and may cause prejudice to the petitioner and be an exercise in futility. The chances of conviction would also be bleak and remote, given that the parties do not wish to pursue the present complaint on account of the settlement. I do not see any reason to reject the settlement arrived at between the parties, voluntarily out of their free will.

9. The Hon’ble Supreme Court and this court has held in a catena of cases that inherent powers under section 482 of the Code are required to be exercised to secure the ends of justice or to prevent abuse of the process of any court. Reliance can be placed upon Suresh Kumar v. Umesh, Crl. MC 1761/2021(Delhi High Court); Sahil Sahay @ Jashwant v. The State (GOVT of NCT of Delhi) & Anr, Crl.M.C. No.794/2016 (Delhi High Court); Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and Another, (2012) 10 SCC 303; Narinder Singh & Ors. Vs. State of Punjab & Anr., 2014 6 SCC 466.