J U D G M E N T

Index to the Judgment Factual Background...........................................................................2 Quashing Of FIR Pursuant To Settlement: Judicial Precedents..3 Examining The Settlement Agreement In Light Of Settled Principles Of Law...............................................................................8 i. Mediated Settlement Agreement In Question............................8 ii. Scope Of Mediated Settlement Agreement: Opinion Of This Court..................................................................................................9 Settlement Of Non-Compoundable And Serious Offences Through Payment Of Money: Beyond The Scope Of Mediation12 i. Guidelines For The Mediators..................................................14 Conclusion.........................................................................................17 SWARANA KANTA SHARMA, J.

1. The instant petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (‘Cr.P.C.’) has been filed on behalf of petitioners seeking quashing of FIR bearing no. 358/2017, registered at Police Station, Sultanpuri, Delhi for the offences punishable under Sections 308/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (‘IPC’) and all consequential proceedings emanating therefrom.

2. Issue notice. Mr. Naresh Kumar Chahar, learned APP accepts notice on behalf of State.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND

3. Brief facts of the case that the complainant has alleged that Arjun Singh who is his neighbour runs a factory in Krishan Vihar, where his brother Bacchu Singh @ Veeru is also working. It is stated that on 05.05.2017, at around 3.30 PM, Bacchu Singh @ Veeru had come outside the house of complainant and had started abusing him. When he tried to stop him from doing so, he had threatened him that he should not file complaint against him and he had thereafter started beating him.When the complainant’s family members had tried to rescue him, he had called the co-accused persons and accused Abhishek @ Love had thrown him on the ground and he was also beaten with bricks by co-accused. Thereafter, they had run away from the spot. The complainant’s family members had taken him to Sanjay Gandhi Memorial Hospital where the police had recorded his statement. He had sustained injuries on the frontal portion of the head. Thereafter, the complainant/respondent no.2 filed a complaint with police authorities and accordingly the present FIR bearing no. 358/2017 was registered at Police Station Sultan Puri, Delhi for the offence punishable under Sections 308/34 IPC against the petitioners.It is stated that during the pendency of the case, with the intervention of the well-wisher and family members, the matter has been amicably settled and compromised between the parties and a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) was signed by them before the Mediation Centre, Rohini Courts, Delhi, for a sum of Rs. 40,000/. 4. During the course of arguments, it was stated that the matter has been amicably settled between the parties and Rs. 30,000/- have to be paid in cash to the complainant in this case for quashing of the FIR.

QUASHING OF FIR PURSUANT TO SETTLEMENT:

JUDICIAL PRECEDENTS

5. At the outset, this Court notes that the guidelines for quashing of the FIRs, in cases where parties have settled the disputes, have been laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in cases of Gian Singh v. State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303, Narinder Singh v. State of Punjab (2014) 6 SCC 466, and Parbhatbhai Aahir v. State of Gujarat (2017) 9 SCC 641.

6. In view of the aforesaid circumstances, a reference may be made to the proposition laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Narinder Singh (supra), wherein it was held that even a non- compoundable offence may be quashed on the ground of a settlement agreement between the offender and the victim, if the circumstances so warrant. The Apex Court observed as under:

"29. In view of the aforesaid discussion, we sum up and lay down the following principles by which the High Court would