Sumit Panwar v. State & Anr.

1. The present petition has been filed seeking quashing of case FIR No.137/2017 under Sections 354/354A/354B/323/509 IPC registered at PS Hauz Khas, Delhi.

2. Briefly stated facts of the case are that the present FIR was lodged on the statement of A to Z (masked identity)/respondent no.2 wherein it was alleged that on 02.05.2017, the petitioner began loudly abusing standing outside of the house of respondent no.2. It is further alleged that he assaulted her and inappropriately touched her.

3. However, due to intervention of relatives, friends and renowned personalities, the dispute between the parties has been settled amicably vide Mutual Agreement dated 11.07.2023 with the following terms and conditions: “(1) That both the parties have mutually agreed to resolve their dispute on the following terms and conditions:- (a) That the First Party and the Second Party have mutually agreed to resolve all their disputes pertaining to the instant complaint, and to spend their lives with peace and harmony; (b) That the First Party will give the statement / no objection before the Hon'ble Delhi High Court for quashing of FIR No. 137/2017 u/s 354/354A/354B/323/509 of IPC registered at P.S. Hauz Khas, Delhi, and consequential proceedings. It has also been agreed that the First Party shall cooperate in all possible manner including signing of the no objection affidavit and appearance before the Hon'ble Delhi High Court for the said purpose. It is also agreed that the quashing proceedings will be filed within 15 days of the execution of MOU.

(c) That neither the First Party nor the Second Party shall claim/raise any demand of compensation etc. whatsoever in future from the other party in any court of law or Authority, and if she/ he does so, the same shall be treated as void abinitio.

(d) That both the parties shall withdraw all the ·complaints / cases, if any, against each other and they further shall not file any complaint /litigation against each other in future regarding the present disputes. (2) That all the disputes between the First Party and Second party have now been resolved, and the First Party and the Second Party shall not interfere in any manner in the lives of each other. (3) That the present Agreement / MOU signed and executed between the parties without any pressure, undue influence, and coercion or threat from any corner and both the parties have executed this MOU with their own free will and consent with the intervention of common friends and relatives. (4) That both the parties undertake not to initiate any proceedings in any manner in any court of Law regarding their previous disputes, after entering into the present Agreement. (5) That both the parties undertake to abide by the terms and conditions of the present MOU whole heartedly.”

4. The parties are present and have been duly identified by the IO. Further, the IO states that except the present FIR there is no other case against the petitioners.

5. 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.

6. I consider that there would be no purpose of continuing with the proceedings and do not see any reason to reject the settlement.

7. However, since both the parties have put an unnecessary burden on the investigation agency and took away a substantial time of courts. I consider that the parties in both the cases should be directed to do some social work which may be a contribution to the society and they should also be put to some duty to do some constructive work.

8. Hence, the parties are directed to plant 200 indigenous trees each in their locality within a period of two months. The trees to be planted should be in consonance with the other plants in the area.

9. IO shall identify the place in consultation with the concerned SDM/Horticulture Department. Concerned SDM/Horticulture Department is also directed to submit a detailed plan that how the parties can be bound to maintain such trees for longer life.

10. The Horticulture Department shall explore the possibility of geotagging the trees planted and shall also put numbers on the trees planted.

11. Let a detailed compliance report of the SDM be called

12. Taking into the account the totality of facts and circumstances the present FIR No.137/2017 under Sections 354/354A/354B/323/509 IPC registered at PS Hauz Khas, Delhi and all the other proceedings emanating therefrom are quashed

13. The present petitions stand disposed of.