Chetna v. The State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) and Anr

Delhi High Court · 10 Feb 2023 · 2023:DHC:1564
Dinesh Kumar Sharma
CRL.M.C. 5119/2022
2023:DHC:1564
criminal petition_allowed Significant

AI Summary

The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR under Sections 279 and 338 IPC based on a full and voluntary settlement between the parties, exercising its inherent power under Section 482 CrPC.

Full Text
Translation output
Neutral Citation Number 2023/DHC/001564
CRL.M.C. 5119/2022
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
CRL.M.C. 5119/2022
SMT. CHETNA ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr.Kesar Singh Sawhnay, Advocate
VERSUS
THE STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI) AND ANR. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr.Digam Singh Dagar, APP for the State.
SISurender Singh, PS Tughlaq Road
Date of Decision: 10.02.2023
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SHARMA
JUDGMENT
DINESH KUMAR SHARMA, J.
(Oral)

1. Present petition has been filed for quashing of FIR No. 72/2016 registered under Section 279/337 IPC PS Tughlaq Road. The FIR was lodged on the statement of Kishan s/o Mr.Kamaswami wherein it was alleged that the complainant along with the injured Manvinder Singh while crossing the road was hit by the offending vehicle SX[4] Car No.DL-8CP-7489 which was being driven by the petitioner in a Signing fast, rash and negligent manner. It has been alleged that the injuries were caused when the car hit a stationary bus No.DL-1VC-1788 due to the carelessness of the petitioner.

2. After the accident, FIR No. 72/2016 was registered under Section 279/337 IPC at PS Tughlaq Road and thereafter chargesheet was filed under Section 279/338 IPC before the learned MM where Section 338 IPC was added instead of Section 337 IPC.

3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that during the pendency of the aforesaid case, the petitioner and respondent no 2/ complainant have reached a settlement and have executed a Memorandum of Settlement. The Memorandum of Settlement dated 09.09.2022 has been placed on record. The terms are as under:

“1. It has been agreed between the parties that the First party / accused shall pay an amount of Rs.2,50,000 only, (Rupees two lakhs Fifty thousand ) to the Second party towards full and final settlement of his claims for the injuries suffered by him in the accident. It has been agreed between the parties that the aforesaid settlement amount shall be paid at the time of quashing of FIR No.72/2016under Section 279/338 IPC, P.S. Tuglak Road by way of NEFT/ DD/RTGs/ Cheques etc, in the name of the Second Party. 2. The Second party agree and undertake to cooperate in quashing of FIR and further agree and undertake to sign necessary paper affidavit and documents required at the time of filing of the petition for quashing of FIR. The Second party agree and undertake to appear before the Honble High Court of Delhi at New Delhi. 3. It has been agreed between the parties that pursuant to the settlement reached between the parties all claims of Second party
Signing against the first party arising out of FIRno.72/2016 stands settled and both the Parties shall have no claim, counter-claim against each other, they shall never try to contact each other in future/file a case/ complaint against each other for the issues which have been resolved amicably through this settlement.
4. This settlement has been voluntarily arrived at between the parties with their own free will and without any force, pressure or coercion and both the parties are bound by terms and conditions mentioned here in above.”

4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner states that since all the claims and disputes have been amicably settled between the parties, no useful purpose would be served by continuing the prosecution pursuant to the aforesaid FIR. He invites the attention of the court to the affidavit of respondent No.2/complainant placed on record wherein respondent No.2/complainant states that he does not any grievance against the petitioner. In view thereof, learned Counsel for the petitioner states that would be in the interest of justice that the said FIR is quashed.

5. The parties are also present before this court and have duly been identified by the IO. Respondent no. 2/complainant states that he has settled the matter voluntarily without any fear, force or coercion. He states that pursuant to the settlement, a Demand Draft No.049189 dated 27.01.2023 in the sum of Rs.2,50,000/- drawn on HDFC Bank, Kalkaji, B Block, New Delhi-110019 has been handed over to the him today and accordingly, he has no objection if FIR No. 72/2016 registered under Section 279/337 IPC PS Tughlaq Road is quashed.

6. The inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is of wide plenitude with no statutory limitation but it has to be exercised in accord with Signing the guidance engrafted in such power viz.: (i) to secure the ends of justice, or (ii) to prevent abuse of the process of any court. In the case of Gian Singh v. State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303, the Supreme Court has observed that in the exercise of its inherent power under Section 482, the High Court can quash FIR/Charge-sheet on the basis of alleged settlement except in cases of rape, murder, dacoity or the cases under the Special Statutes like Prevention of Corruption Act or the offences committed by public servants while working in that capacity etc. It has also been repeatedly held that the High Court may quash the criminal proceedings if in its view, because of the compromise between the offender and the victim, the possibility of conviction is remote and bleak and continuation of the criminal case would put the accused to great oppression and prejudice and extreme injustice would be caused to him by not quashing the criminal case despite full and complete settlement and compromise with the victim. Reliance can be placed upon Madhavrao Jiwajirao Scindia v. Sambhajirao Chandrojiroo Angre, (1988) 1 SCC 692

7. In the present case, it appears from the averments of the affidavit as well as interaction with respondent no.2/ complainant that he is not going to support the case of the prosecution and the possibility of conviction is remote and bleak. In view of the matter, the continuation of the criminal proceedings would be an exercise in futility and it will an abuse of the process of the court. There would no purpose in continuing with the present proceedings and accordingly, FIR No. Signing 72/2016 registered under Section 279/338 IPC PS Tughlaq Road along with all the proceedings emanating therefrom are quashed.

8. The petition stands disposed of.

DINESH KUMAR SHARMA, J FEBRUARY 10, 2023 Signing