Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Dinesh Kumar Sharma, J.
Parveen Alias Mintoo & Ors. – Appellants
Versus
The State NCT of Delhi & Ors. – Respondents
Crl.M.C. 6613 of 2022
Decided On : 02-08-2023
Settlement - Quashing of FIR - The court quashed the FIR and related proceedings after the parties involved in the case settled their disputes amicably, and the court found it difficult to attribute the offence under Section 308 IPC. The court considered the totality of facts and circumstances and decided to put an end to the dispute in the interest of justice.
Fact of the Case:
The petition sought quashing of FIR no.330 dated 12.08.2013 registered under Section 323/427/452/34 IPC at PS Burari, as the parties had amicably resolved their disputes and entered into a compromise deed.
Finding of the Court:
The court found it difficult to attribute the offence under Section 308 IPC and considered the settlement of disputes in the interest of justice. The court decided to quash the FIR and related proceedings.
Issues: The issues involved were the settlement of disputes between the parties, the addition of Section 308 IPC in the charge sheet, and the quashing of the FIR and related proceedings.
Ratio Decidendi: The court considered the settlement of disputes, the difficulty in attributing the offence under Section 308 IPC, and the bleak chances of conviction due to the settlement in reaching its decision to quash the FIR and related proceedings.
Final Decision: The court quashed the case FIR no.330 dated 12.08.2013 registered under Section 323/427/452/34 IPC at PS Burari along with the other proceedings emanating therefrom.
JUDGMENT
Dinesh Kumar Sharma, J. (Oral)
CRL.M.A. 25736/2022 (exemption)
Exemption is allowed subject to all just exceptions.
Application stands disposed of.
CRL.M.C. 6613/2022
1. The Present petition has been filed seeking quashing of FIR no.330 dated 12.08.2013 registered under Section 323/427/452/34 IPC at PS Burari.
2. Initially, the FIR was lodged on the complaint of Mahesh Kumar under Section 323/427/452/34 IPC alleging therein that on 11.08.2013 at about 10.30 p.m. while he was at his Dhaba along with his brother Suresh, two three persons forcibly entered his Dhaba and started abusing him. When Suresh resisted to it the assailants started beating both the brothers and accused Mintoo assaulted the complainant with an iron rod. The nephew of Rahul who came at that time was also beaten. After the completion of investigation, the charge sheet has been filed.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that both the parties are residents of the same locality and have amicably resolved all their disputes with the help and intervention of well-wishers and common friends and family. The parties have resolved their disputes and have entered into a compromise deed dated 24.09.2022.
4. I have gone through the charge-sheet filed by the prosecution. Initially, the FIR was lodged under Section 323/427/452/34 IPC however later on as one of the persons was found to have suffered grievous injuries, the offence was converted into section 325 IPC. The charge sheet reveals that only during scrutiny, Section 308 IPC was added. However, the charge sheet is silent about the reasons for adding Section 308 IPC. Injured Rahul/petitioner no.4, who had suffered grievous injuries is present in court and states that he had suffered injuries on his nose.
5. I consider that in these circumstances, it would be difficult to attribute the offence under Section 308 IPC. Furthermore, the parties have settled all the disputes amicably, in the interest of justice it would be better to put a quietus to the dispute. The chances of conviction would also be bleak and remote, given that the parties do not wish to pursue the present complaint on account of the settlement. I do not see any reason to reject the settlement.
6. Taking into account the totality of facts and circumstances, the case FIR no.330 dated 12.08.2013 registered under Section 323/427/452/34 IPC at PS Burari along with the other proceedings emanating therefrom is quashed.
7. The petition stands disposed of.
The court can quash a case and related proceedings if the parties have amicably settled their disputes and it is in the interest of justice to do so.
The court emphasized the importance of amicably settling trivial disputes and considered the nature of injuries and circumstances in deciding to quash the FIRs.
The central legal point established in the judgment is that if parties settle a trivial dispute amicably and the nature of injuries and the private nature of the dispute support it, the court may qua....
Cases arising from matrimonial differences should be put to rest if parties reach an amicable settlement, and the nature of injuries and circumstances should be considered in determining the quashabi....
Courts may quash criminal proceedings when chances of conviction are bleak and a settlement between the parties would lead to better relations, and may impose costs on the petitioners in appropriate ....
Amicable settlement between parties and the complainant's statement expressing no objection to quashing the FIR can lead to the quashing of criminal proceedings.
The High Court can quash non-compoundable offences under Section 308 of IPC if the parties have amicably resolved their dispute, ensuring the ends of justice and preventing abuse of process.
The court established that charges under serious offences require substantial evidence, and settlements can lead to quashing in cases with a civil nature.
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
