Vikash Choudhary & Anr. v. State & Anr.

1. The present petitions have been filed under Section 482 Cr. PC seeking quashing of FIR No. 530/2018 under section 308/341/506/34 registered at PS Vasant Kunj.

2. Briefly stated, the present FIR was lodged by respondent No.2 alleging therein that he was doing the business of dairy farming and selling milk. On 09.10.2018, around 1:32 am, the complainant went to meet Piyush @ Maunki, a boy from his village at Hotel Blue Eyes Bar Pub near Paradise Hotel Mahipalpur, New Delhi. The complainant was talking with Piyush at the main gate of the club when a person in the name of Shiv Kumar who was the owner of the bar, came out and started abusing him and told him why he had come there. The complainant requested him not to abuse him as he had come to meet Piyush, then Shiv Kumar who is the owner of said club, whose name he came to know later on, suddenly attacked him on his head along with his associates whose names are Vicky and Vipin. Since the sudden attack upon him, the complainant had fallen down after that they along with other associates also attacked him again with a lathi and road. When the complainant tried to flee, they caught him and put off his clothes which had already been torn in the quarrel. They dragged the complainant on the road in the naked position and they continued beating him till he became unconscious due to which he sustained grievous and dangerous injuries on his body i.e. hands, legs, and chest He also alleged that some days back a quarrel also took place with the aforesaid persons on the same place but later same was compromised amicably. When he reached at Club at about 1:30 a.m., the club was open and the above persons attacked him with the plan and attempted to kill the complainant. Based on these complaints, the present FIR was registered and the matter is pending adjudication before the Learned MM, KKD Courts, Delhi.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that during the pendency of proceedings, the parties have amicably resolved all their disputes with the help and intervention of well-wishers and common friends vide settlement agreement dated 01.08.2023 on the following terms and conditions:

4. The parties are present in person and have been duly identified by the IO. The parties state that they have amicably settled all their disputes and grievances vide the settlement deed dated 01.08.2023 and do not wish to pursue the present complaint any further.

5. Respondent no. 2 states that he has entered into a settlement voluntarily without fear, force, or coercion, and has no objection if the present FIR and all other proceedings emanating therefrom is quashed. The parties state that they are making the statement voluntarily against all claims (past, present, and future) without any fear, force, undue influence, or coercion.

6. It has also come to notice that Respondent No. 2 had suffered grievous injuries, therefore offense under Section 308 IPC was attributed as he was assaulted by Danda. It seems that the incident had occurred at the spur of the moment, and it was not a pre-meditated assault. It is also doubtful whether Section 308 IPC will actually be attributed or not in view of the nature of injuries.

7. It has repeatedly been held by this court and the Hon’ble Supreme Court that if there is a trivial dispute between the parties and they have settled the matter amicably, it is desirable to put a quietus to the matter in dispute. It has also been held that merely because the FIR is registered under Section 308 IPC, it would not debar the court from quashing the FIR. The court has to look at the nature of injuries and all the attendant circumstances. Reliance can be placed on Yashpal Chaudhrani and Others vs. State (Govt. of NCT Delhi) and Another, 2019 SCC OnLine Del 8179; Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, (2012) 10 SCC 303.

8. Learned Addl. P.P. for the State submits that as per the Investigating Officer, there is no other dispute between the parties.