Full Text
Translation output
W.P.(CRL) 3451/2019 1
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Date of Decision: December 11, 2019
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Date of Decision: December 11, 2019
W.P.(CRL) 3451/2019 & Crl.M.A. 42393/2019
PARAMJEET SINGH @ PARMEET ..... Petitioner
Through: Ms. Anjali Nehra & Mr.Raghuvendera Singh, Advocates
PARAMJEET SINGH @ PARMEET ..... Petitioner
Through: Ms. Anjali Nehra & Mr.Raghuvendera Singh, Advocates
VERSUS
STATE, GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR. ..... Respondents
Through: Ms. Nandita Rao, Additional Standing Counsel with SI
Shamsher Singh for respondent No.1/State Respondent No.2 in person.
Through: Ms. Nandita Rao, Additional Standing Counsel with SI
Shamsher Singh for respondent No.1/State Respondent No.2 in person.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BRIJESH SETHI
JUDGMENT
BRIJESH SETHI, J (oral)
Quashing of FIR No. 901/2015, under Sections 354/509 IPC, registered at police station Jaitpur, Delhi is sought on the basis of affidavit of 26th August, 2019 of second respondent and on the ground that the misunderstanding which led to registration of the FIR, now stands cleared between the parties.
Ms. Nandita Rao, learned Additional Standing Counsel for respondent-State accepts notice and submits that respondent No.2, present
2019:DHC:6900
Quashing of FIR No. 901/2015, under Sections 354/509 IPC, registered at police station Jaitpur, Delhi is sought on the basis of affidavit of 26th August, 2019 of second respondent and on the ground that the misunderstanding which led to registration of the FIR, now stands cleared between the parties.
Ms. Nandita Rao, learned Additional Standing Counsel for respondent-State accepts notice and submits that respondent No.2, present
2019:DHC:6900
W.P.(CRL) 3451/2019 2 in the Court, is complainant/first-informant of the FIR in question and she has been identified to be so, by Investigating Officer of this case on the basis of identity proof produced by her.
Respondent No.2, present in the Court, submits that the dispute between the parties has been amicably resolved and she affirms the contents of aforesaid Affidavit of 26th August, 2019 supporting this petition and submits that now no dispute with petitioner survives and so, the proceedings arising out of the FIR in question be brought to an end.
Upon hearing and on perusal of the FIR of this Case, I find that continuance of proceedings arising out of the FIR in question would be an exercise in futility as the misunderstanding, which led to registration of the FIR, now stands cleared between the parties.
Accordingly, this petition is allowed and FIR No. 901/2015, under
Sections 354/509 IPC, registered at police station Jaitpur, Delhi and the proceedings emanating therefrom are quashed qua petitioner.
This petition and application stand disposed of accordingly.
(BRIJESH SETHI)
JUDGE
DECEMBER 11, 2019 r 2019:DHC:6900
Respondent No.2, present in the Court, submits that the dispute between the parties has been amicably resolved and she affirms the contents of aforesaid Affidavit of 26th August, 2019 supporting this petition and submits that now no dispute with petitioner survives and so, the proceedings arising out of the FIR in question be brought to an end.
Upon hearing and on perusal of the FIR of this Case, I find that continuance of proceedings arising out of the FIR in question would be an exercise in futility as the misunderstanding, which led to registration of the FIR, now stands cleared between the parties.
Accordingly, this petition is allowed and FIR No. 901/2015, under
Sections 354/509 IPC, registered at police station Jaitpur, Delhi and the proceedings emanating therefrom are quashed qua petitioner.
This petition and application stand disposed of accordingly.
(BRIJESH SETHI)
JUDGE
DECEMBER 11, 2019 r 2019:DHC:6900