Full Text
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
CRL.M.C. 3364/2022
PARVEZ ALAM ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Suresh Prasad with Mr. Bhuvnesh Mittal, Mr. Mithilesh Kumar Jaiswal and Mr. Sandeep Singh, Advocates.
Through: Mr. Satinder Singh Baba, APP for the
State Ms. Rajni Sharma, Advocate for respondent No.2 with respondent
No.2 in person.
Date of Decision: 06th January, 2023
JUDGMENT
1. This is a petition for quashing of
┌─────────────────────────────────────┬──────────────────────────────────────────┐ │ FIR No.231/2019 under Sections 279/337 IPC was lodged. │ After the │ ├─────────────────────────────────────┼──────────────────────────────────────────┤ │ investigat 146/196 MV parties ha │ ion, chargesheet under Sections │ │ Deed dated Compromise has been a │ 279/337/338 IPC and Sections Act was │ │ grievance party. amicable s 2. T │ filed. However, during the pendency of │ │ have enter namely Par Ahmad out │ the trial, the ve entered into the │ │ injured pe vehicle. 3. I court that │ settlement. The │ │ be an enco would reso where the │ Settlement-cum-Compromise 20.02.2020 has │ │ useful pur continue, case quash │ been placed on record. In the │ │ CRL.M.C. 3 │ Settlement-cum- Deed dated 20.02.2020, │ │ │ it has been stated that now the dispute │ │ │ micably settled amongst the parties and │ │ │ the victims have no and claim of any │ │ │ nature either civil or criminal against │ │ │ the either MACT No.369/2020 has also │ │ │ been disposed of in view of the │ │ │ ettlement vide order 10.11.2020. he │ │ │ injured persons are present in Court. │ │ │ They have stated that they ed into the │ │ │ settlement with the driver of the │ │ │ offending vehicle vez Ahmed and owner of │ │ │ the offending vehicle namely Vakil of │ │ │ their own free will without any fear, │ │ │ force and coercion. The rsons state that │ │ │ they have forgiven the driver of the │ │ │ offending │ │ │ │ │ │ t has repeatedly been held by the │ │ │ Hon’ble Supreme Court and this if the │ │ │ dispute between the parties is private │ │ │ in nature, there should urage of │ │ │ settlement. In such cases settlement │ │ │ between parties lve a festering private │ │ │ dispute. It is also imperative to point │ │ │ that chances of an ultimate conviction │ │ │ are bleak and, therefore, no pose is │ │ │ likely to be served by allowing a │ │ │ criminal prosecution to the court may │ │ │ while taking into consideration the │ │ │ special facts of a the proceedings. │ │ │ 364/2022 Page 2 of 3 │ └─────────────────────────────────────┴──────────────────────────────────────────┘
2. The injured persons are present in Court. They have stated that they have entered into the settlement with the driver of the offending vehicle namely Parvez Ahmed and owner of the offending vehicle namely Vakil Ahmad out of their own free will without any fear, force and coercion. The injured persons state that they have forgiven the driver of the offending vehicle.
3. It has repeatedly been held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court and this court that if the dispute between the parties is private in nature, there should be an encourage of settlement. In such cases settlement between parties would resolve a festering private dispute. It is also imperative to point that where 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, the court may while taking into consideration the special facts of a case quash the proceedings.
4. Since the offence predominantly is personal in nature and the parties have entered into the settlement, the Settlement-cum-Compromise Deed dated 20.02.2020 is accepted.
5. This court is of the view that there would be no purpose of continuing with the trial. However, the petitioner is directed to deposit a sum of Rs.25,000/- with the Employees Welfare Fund within 10 days and file the receipt with the Registry.
6. Taking into account the totality of facts and circumstances, the case FIR No.231/2019 under Sections 279/337 IPC registered at Police Station New Friends Colony and all the proceedings emanating therefrom are quashed.
7. The present petition stands disposed of.
DINESH KUMAR SHARMA, J JANUARY 06, 2023 VERMA