SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img



IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Suresh Kumar Kait, J.
Vijay Singh - Appellant
Versus
State (NCT of Delhi) - Respondent
Crl.M.C. 672 of 2021
Decided On : 19-03-2021




Amicable resolution of a dispute between parties, affirmed by the complainant, can lead to the quashing of an FIR under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

Headnote:(A) Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Section 482 - Quashing of FIR - FIR No. 384/2013 quashed by the Court where parties amicably resolved their dispute through a Settlement Agreement dated 08.05.2017 - Complainant affirmed the settlement and expressed her desire not to prosecute further - No useful purpose served in continuing with FIR proceedings. (Paras 6 to 9)

(B) Dispute Resolution - Settlement through mediation leads to the quashing of FIR if complainant does not wish to pursue matter further.

Facts of the case:
Petitioners sought quashing of FIR on the basis of an amicable resolution reached on 08.05.2017 regarding a complaint filed by respondent No.2 in 2013.

Findings of Court:
Given the amicable settlement and the complainant's wish not to proceed, the FIR was quashed.

Issues: The key issue was whether an FIR could be quashed following mutual resolution of the dispute by the parties involved.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that amicable resolutions between parties, affirmed by the complainant, can lead to the quashing of FIRs, thereby allowing the court to dispose of the matter as no further prosecution is desired.

Result: FIR No. 384/2013 quashed and petition allowed.

Table of Content
1. petitioners and complainant settled dispute (Para 1 , 5 , 6 , 7)
2. court observes settlement and efficiency (Para 3 , 4 , 8)
3. fir quashed due to resolution (Para 9)
4. petition allowed and concluded (Para 10)

JUDGMENT (Oral)

1. Vide this petition, quashing of FIR No. 384/2013, registered at police station Burari, Delhi is sought by petitioners.

2. Notice issued.

3. Mr. Panna Lal Sharma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent No.1/State accepts notice and submits that respondent No.2 is present in the Court and she has been identified as the complainant of FIR in question by the Investigating Officer of this case, who is also present in the Court.

4. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the present petition is taken up for final hearing and disposal.

5. Petitioners and respondent No.2/complainant are residing in the same locality. On 22.09.2013, respondent No.2 filed a complaint against the petitioners on the basis of which FIR in question was registered.

6. The present petition has been filed on the ground that the dispute inter se parties has been amicably resolved in terms of Settlement Agreement dated 08.05.2017 reached through Mediation Centre, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi.

7. Respondent No.2 is present in the Court has affirmed the factum of settlement with petitioners in terms of Settlement Agreement dated 08.05.2017 and she also submits that she does not wish to prosecute the matter any further.

8. Keeping in view that the dispute between the parties has been amicably resolved, this Court is inclined to quash the FIR in question, as no useful purpose would be served in continuing with the proceedings arising out of the present FIR.

9. For the reasons afore-noted, FIR No. 384/2013, registered at police station Burari, Delhi and consequent proceedings emanating therefrom are quashed.

10. The petition is, accordingly, allowed and disposed of.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top