Bablu Kumar & Ors. v. The State (N.C.T. of Delhi) & Anr.

Delhi High Court · 04 Sep 2018 · 2018:DHC:8514
A. K. Pathak
CRL.M.C.4443/2018
2018:DHC:8514
criminal petition_allowed

AI Summary

The Delhi High Court quashed two cross FIRs at the investigation stage based on an amicable compromise between the parties, holding that continuing criminal proceedings would not serve any useful purpose.

Full Text
Translation output
$-53/64 HIGH COURT OF DELHI
CRL.M.C.4443/2018 and Crl.
M.A.no.31201/2018
BABLU KUMAR& ORS. Petitioners
Through Mr.Vijay Kumar,Adv.
VERSUS
THE STATE(N.C.T.OF DELHI)& ANR. Respondents
Through Ms. Aashaa Tiwari, APP with SI Devender Singh,P.S.Govind Puri
Respondent no.2in person AND
CRL.M.C.4397/2018 and Crl.
M.A.no.31007/2018
SUKHBIR& ORS. Petitioners
Through Mr.Vijay Kumar,Adv.
VERSUS
THE STATE(N.C.T.OF DELHI)& ANR. Respondents
Through Ms. Aashaa Tiwari, APP with SI Devender Singh and SI Deepak
Panwar,P.S. Govind Puri Respondent no.2in person
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE A.K.PATHAK
04.09.2018 By these petitions, petitioners have prayed for quashing of the following cross FIRs:-
2018:DHC:8514 (a) FIR No. 183/2018 under Sections 323/341/354(B)/354/509/34 IPG registered at P.S. Govind Puri on the complaint of Mr. Sukhbir @ Lala, respondent no. 2 in Crl. M.C. No. 4443/2018 and petitioner no. 1 in Crl.
M.C.No.4397/2018.
(b) FIR No. 179/2018 under Sections 452/323/509/506/34 IPG registered atP.S. Govind Puri on the complaint ofMr.Bablu Kumar,respondent no.2 in Grl.M.G.No4397/2018 and petitioner no. 1 in Grl. M.G.No.4443/2018.
Both the complainants, i.e., Mr. Sukhbir @ Lala and Mr. Bablu Kumar are present in Gourt and have been identified by SI Devender Singh of police station Govind Puri. They submit that they have settled the matter with the accused persons in their respective FIRs,vide a Gompromise
Deed dated August,2018. They further submit that they do not wish to pursue their respective FIRs, which are at the investigation stage and the same may be quashed.
Keeping in mind the settlement arrived at between the petitioners and private respondents and the compromise entered into between them,in my view,no fruitful purpose would be served to keep the criminal proceedings pending. Accordingly, in the interest ofjustice, both the aforesaid FIRs, which are atthe investigation stage,are quashed.
(5)
Petitions are disposed of in the above terms. Miscellaneous applications are disposed ofas infructuous. Dasti.
SEPTEMBER 04,2018 r.bararia A.K.PATHAK,J.
JUDGMENT