Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Dinesh Kumar Sharma, J.
Ayush Chaudhary & Anr. – Appellants
Versus
State (NCT of Delhi) & Anr. – Respondents
Cr.M.C. 4911 of 2022
Decided On : 09-02-2023
Abuse of Process - Criminal Proceedings - Section 482 of the Code - [323/325/34 IPC] - The court evaluated whether the ends of justice would justify the exercise of the inherent power under Section 482. The decision as to whether a criminal proceeding or FIR should be quashed on the ground that the offender and victim have settled the dispute revolves ultimately on the facts and circumstances of each case. The Courts must give due regard to the nature and gravity of the offence. However, no precise and inflexible guidelines can be provided. The main aim is to do real, complete, and substantial justice.
Fact of the Case:
The complainant sustained injuries in an altercation with the accused, leading to a nasal bone fracture and head injuries. The accused sought quashing of the FIR based on a compromise, but the court found no proper settlement between the parties.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that no proper settlement had been arrived at between the parties, and the complainant still suffered trauma from the incident. Therefore, no ground for quashing of the present FIR was made out.
Issues: The main issue was whether the FIR should be quashed based on the alleged compromise between the parties.
Ratio Decidendi: The court evaluated the nature and gravity of the offence, the presence of a proper settlement, and the trauma suffered by the complainant in determining whether the FIR should be quashed.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the petition seeking quashing of the FIR, as no proper settlement had been reached between the parties and the complainant still suffered trauma from the incident.
JUDGMENT
Dinesh Kumar Sharma, J. (Oral)
1. Present petition has been filed under section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of FIR No. 133/2022 registered u/s 323/325/34 IPC at PS CR Park, Delhi. The said FIR dated 10.04.2022 was lodged at the instance of the respondent No.2/complainant.
2. The allegations as per the FIR is that around two months prior to the registration of the present FIR, the accused persons namely Ayush Chaudhary and Vaibhav Ayer, whom the complainant knew through a common friend named Tathagat, gave the complainant a call and told him as to why he met one girl named Ms. X. The complainant stated that he doesn't have any contact with her but they did not believe him and continuously threatened him so the complainant blocked their phone numbers. Thereafter, on 10.04.2022 the complainant got a call from Tathagat stating that accused persons Ayush and Vaibhav want to meet him and sort out the matter and that he should come to I block, CR Park. When the complainant got there, Tahagat was already there with 3-4 men and Ayush and Vaibhav reached the spot in their car. The accused who were in an inebriated state started threatening the complainant as to why he was meeting Ms. X. The complainant told them that he was not meeting the girl but they did not agree and hit him on his face. When the complainant tried to save his face, the accused persons held him by his hair and started hitting his face with their fist. The nasal bone of the complainant got fractured and started bleeding and he felt giddy, which is when, accused Ayush took off his belt and started hitting him on his head with the belt. His head started bleeding and he sustained several injuries on the head. Tathagat tried to save the complainant but the accused persons kept beating him mercilessly. Thereafter the complainant felt giddy and fell down and the accused fled. Later the complainant was taken to Max Hospital where he was treated. The complainant sustained a nasal bone fracture and got several stitches on his head.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the FIR got registered due to some misunderstanding between the parties. He submits that however, on 26.04.2022, due to the intervention of common friends and well-wishers, the parties have arrived at a compromise. Learned counsel submits that the parents of the petitioner/accused have apologised to the parents of the complainant as well as the complaint vide a hand written letter dated 26.04.2022. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that this apology letter dated 26.04.2022 is the compromise deed. The same has been annexed as Annexure B to the present petition.
4. Learned APP for the state submits that the chargesheet has been filed. He opposes the quashing and submits that the complainant sustained injuries of a grievous nature.
5. Arguments heard.
6. Perusal of the record reflects that there is no proper settlement/compromise deed on the record, basis which the parties are stated to have settled their dispute. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the apology letter dated 26.04.2022 is the compromise deed is rejected and only goes to show the lax and casual attitude with which this petition has been filed. The letter dated 26.04.2022 is a one page hand written apology note written by the parents of the petitioner/accused to the parents of the complainant and is reproduced hereunder:
"Date 26.04.2022
To,
Mr. & Mrs. Mazumdar,
SUB: APOLOGY AND CONSENT.
We the parents of Ayush Chaudhary and Vaibhav Iyer promise and assume that they won't be seen in CR Park and would not have kind of connection with Vedankshu Mazumdar.
We are sorry for the misadventure happened between the kids in Cr Park, I Block park. We sincerely apologise for the grievance and injuries caused to Vedankshu Mazumdar by our kids as mentioned above on 10th April 2022.
Sd
(Shekar and Mahua Chaudhary)
Sd
(Suresh Iyer & Sindhu Iyer)"
7. The above letter in no way states that the parties have mutuall
The decision to quash a criminal proceeding based on a compromise between the parties depends on the facts and circumstances of each case, with due regard to the nature and gravity of the offence, an....
The central legal point established is that criminal proceedings can be quashed if the possibility of conviction is remote due to a compromise between the offender and the victim, causing extreme inj....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the inherent power under Section 482 Cr.PC can be exercised to quash criminal proceedings based on an amicable settlement, even in cases of no....
The court has the inherent power to quash criminal proceedings, even in non-compoundable cases, if it serves the ends of justice and prevents abuse of the court's process.
Amicable settlement between parties and the complainant's statement expressing no objection to quashing the FIR can lead to the quashing of criminal proceedings.
High Court can quash FIR under Section 307 IPC on genuine compromise if injuries non-vital, incident spur of moment without intent to kill, prosecution evidence incomplete, promoting social harmony a....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
