Full Text
. nAREKDER&ORS ..Petitioners
Through Mr. M.M. Khan, Advocate. versus, THE STATE (NCT OF DELHI) &ANR Respondents
Throiigh Mr.G;M.Farooqui,,APPforthe
^ I . • . ^ State..' • '
• ' , Mr. Faisal, Advocate for respondent
' '• ' v , No.2, -
NARENDER ' , - , Petitioner . ' -' - Through> Mr. M.M. Khan, Advocate.
•
Through Mr. G.M. Farooqui, APP for the State. .
• Mr. Faisal, Advocate for respondent
: . ,No.2. .
'NARE^®ER&ANR , , ; .....Petitioners
Through . Mr. M.M. Khan, Advocate.
Through, Mr. G.M. Farooqui, APP for the
• • .State.
' Mr. Faisal, Advocate forrespondent
• • . ; - • .•.-No.2. - • , W.P.(CRL) 1324/2018'
Page 1 2018:DHC:8471 Petitioner SAROJ &ORS m.M. Khan, Advocate.
Mr. Faisal Advocate for respondent No.2.
MS. 0/^ , 23S0I8
•• rrlMC 2267/2018 seek quashing of FIR
JUDGMENT
1 The petitioners in Crl.M.*-. ^ o • ':isArAV341/509/34 IPC, Pohce Station No 528/2015 under Sections 354(A)/ • Prl MC 2268/2018 seeks quashing BharatNagar. pe—mCrl.M.C 2268/ ^ of FIR No.160/2016 under Sections 35 ( ) Ot _ • rviiu r 2269/2018 seeks station Bharat Nagar. The petitioners mCrl.M.C. fir No.219/2017 under Section S K,P.B» BhinWP(Crl) 1324/2018 seekquashingofFIRNo.10/2018 under Sections 323/3 nKNos.528/2015, 160/2016and219/2017 arethe cross-FIRs No.10/2018.
2 Parties are klated to each other and are also neighbours. The.,ectFIRSemanateoutofmatrimonialdiscor. inCrl.M.C.2267/2018,Crl.M.C.2268/2018& Crl.M.C.2269/201 thebrother-in-law ofthe respondentNo.2. CRLMC. 2267/2018 & 3^ ' The parties submit that with the intervention pf respectable ' ^. people ofthe locality and relatives, the disputes between the parties have been settled., • ^ • Status report hasbeenfiled. The same is takenonrecord. ThoughFIRNo.10/2018 hasbeen registered under Section313 IPG, learned counselfor thepetitionerhas pointedoutto the reportof the Chief Medical Officer, Gynaecological Department, Bara Hindu Rao Hospital, who has stated that the patient-was admitted with four, months pregnancy and abortion process-had started on admiss.on and no opinioncouldbe givenwithregardto causeofabortion.
6. Parties are presentinperson, representedby respective counsel and identifiedbythe InvestigatingOfficer. They submitthattheyhave settled all their disputes.'They further submitthatthey do not wish to "press their respective complaints. '
7. In view ofthe fact tot disputes betweenthe parties have been settled, continuation of cririiinai proceedings will be an exercise m futility and justice in the case demands that the dispute between the parties is put to an end and peace is restored; securing the ends of justicebeingthe ultimate guidingfactor. Itwould alsobeexpedientto • quash the subject FIRs and the consequent proceedings emanating •therefrom.,, ^ • 8 In view of the above, the petitions are allowed. FIR, No.528/2015 under Sections 354(A)/341/509/34 IPG, Police Station
4.
5. CRLMC. 2267/2018 &, Other connected matters.., Bharat Nagar, FIRNo.160/20.16 under Sections 354(A)/354/509 IPG, • Police Station Bharat Nagar, FIR.No.219/2017 under, Sections >: 323/341/354/354B/506/509/34 IPG, Police Station Bharat Nagar and FIR No,10/2018, under Sections 323/341/313/354/34 IPG, Pohce Station Ashok.Vihar ^nd the, consequent proceedings emanating therefrom are accordingly quashed...
9. Order Dasti under signatures ofthe Court Master.,I 1, • ^ ^ QuLAJcJua ' ^SANJEl^ SACHDEVA, J;may;23,'2018-,.st • •: • CRL.M.C. 2267/2018 & Other connected matters. Page 4