Mahesh Kumar & Ors. v. State & Anr.

Delhi High Court · 16 Jan 2017 · 2017:DHC:260
S.P. Garg
Crl.M.C.170/2017
2017:DHC:260
criminal petition_dismissed

AI Summary

The Delhi High Court dismissed a successive petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of an FIR on the same grounds as earlier dismissed petitions, holding it an abuse of process despite an alleged amicable settlement.

Full Text
Translation output
Crl.M.C.170/2017 HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Date of Decision: JANUARY 16, 2017
CRL.M.C.170/2017 & Crl.M.A.788/2017
MAHESH KUMAR & ORS. ..... Petitioners
Through : Mr.J.P.Malviya, Advocate.
VERSUS
STATE & ANR. ..... Respondents
Through : Mr.Arun Kr.Sharma, APP.
SI Mahipal Singh, P.S. Ghazipur
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG S.P.GARG, J. (ORAL)
JUDGMENT

1. Present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioners for quashing of FIR No.266/2011 registered under Section 307/34 IPC at Police Station Ghazipur. It is stated that the matter has been settled between the petitioner and respondent No.2 amicably.

2. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have examined the file. On perusal of the file, it reveals that similar petition Crl.M.C.No.1848/2016 was earlier filed by the petitioners for the same purpose and by a detailed order dated 13.05.2016, it was dismissed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court. The petitioners again preferred another Crl.M.C.No.4395/2016 for quashing on the same grounds which was dismissed as withdrawn by an order dated 24.11.2016. 2017:DHC:260 Crl.M.C.170/2017

3. Without any change of the circumstances, the petitioners have again preferred the present petition for quashing of the FIR on the basis of settlement. This is not fair and apparently is an abuse of the process of the court. The successive petition for quashing on similar grounds after dismissal of earlier one on merits cannot be entertained and is dismissed with costs of `25,000/- to be deposited within two weeks with Delhi High Court Legal Services Committee.

4. The petition and all pending application(s) stand disposed of. The registry shall ensure the compliance of the order.

JUDGE JANUARY 16, 2017 sa