Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Sunil Gaur, J.
Sunil Kumar - Appellant
Versus
State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) - Respondent
Crl.M.C. 704 of 2019 & Crl.M.A. 2887 of 2019
Decided On : 07-02-2019
1. Quashing of F.I.R. No. 13/2019, under Sections 376/328 of IPC, registered at Police Station Raj Park, Delhi is sought in this petition on the basis of affidavit of 11th January, 2019 of second respondent, who is the complainant of FIR in question.
2. Supreme Court in Parbatbhai Aahir @ Parbatbhai Bhimsinhbhai Vs. State of Gujarat, (2017) 9 SCC 641 has reiterated the parameters for exercising inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of FIR/criminal complaint, which are as under:
"16.6. In the exercise of the power under Section 482 and while dealing with a plea that the dispute has been settled, the High Court must have due regard to the nature and gravity of the offence. Heinous and serious offences involving mental depravity or offences such as murder, rape and dacoity cannot appropriately be quashed though the victim or the family of the victim have settled the dispute. Such offences are, truly speaking, not private in nature but have a serious impact upon society. The decision to continue with the trial in such cases is founded on the overriding element of public interest in punishing persons for serious offences."
3. Merely because respondent No.2/prosecutrix has given a different version later on, would not justify quashing of FIR in question, as the said statement is required to be put to prosecutrix when she steps into the witness box. Supreme Court in Parbatbhai Aahir (Supra) has cautioned the Courts not to quash the FIR relating to heinous crimes.
4. No case for quashing of FIR in question is made out.
5. This petition and application are accordingly dismissed while not commenting upon the merits of the case.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
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
