Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
MR. SANJEEV NARULA, J
HAMMAD AHMED & ANR. – Appellant
Versus
STATE (GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI) & ANR. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. jurisdiction under article 226 and public interest for quashing (Para 1) |
| 2. amicable settlement in family disputes leading to quashing (Para 4 , 5 , 10) |
| 3. allegations of breaches post-settlement should not affect quashing (Para 7 , 8) |
| 4. court's power to quash based on previous decisions and settlement adherence (Para 11 , 12) |
| 5. assessment of private vs public interests in criminal proceedings (Para 14 , 16) |
ORDER
1. The present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, 1950 read with Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 , [“ BNSS ”] (pari materia Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, [“Cr.P.C.”] seeks quashing of FIR no. 0089/2014, [“the impugned FIR”] dated 11th March, 2014 registered under Sections 34 /406/408/420/468/471 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 , [“ IPC ”] at P.S. Kamla Market. This prayers rests on a settlement between the parties.
2. The factual backdrop, in brief, is as follows:
2.1. The FIR was registered of the basis of a complaint lodged by M/s Hamdard Laboratories (India), a Trust, through one of its trustees, Mr. Asad Mueed (Respondent No. 2/Complainant), against two other trustees, Mr. Hammad Ahme
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
