Full Judgment Text
$~63
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of Decision: 07.11.2024
+ CRL.M.C. 8091/2024
AJAY YADAV .....Petitioner
Through: Mr.Deepak Rohilla, Mr.Jitender Gupta
and Mr.Amit Yadav, Advocates with
petitioner in person.
versus
THE STATE GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR.....Respondents
Through: Ms.Meenakshi Dahiya, APP for State
with SI Sanyukta, P.S. South Campus.
Respondent No.2 in person.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR MENDIRATTA
% J U D G M E N T
ANOOP KUMAR MENDIRATTA, J (ORAL)
CRL.M.A. 30949/2024
Exemption allowed, subject to just exceptions.
Application stands disposed of
CRL.M.C. 8091/2024
1. Petition under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita,
2023 (‘BNSS’) has been preferred on behalf of petitioner for quashing of
FIR No.0127/2018, under Sections 354/354D/506 IPC, registered at
P.S.: South Campus.
2. Issue notice. Learned APP for the State alongwith respondent No.2 in
person appear on advance notice and accept notice.
3. In brief, as per the case of prosecution, present FIR was registered on
Signature Not Verified
CRL.M.C. 8091/2024 Page 1 of 4
Digitally Signed
By:DINESH CHANDRA
Signing Date:28.11.2024
16:36:22
26.06.2018 at instance of respondent No.2 who alleged that she had stopped
all her communication with the petitioner due to his aggressive behaviour.
However, petitioner who was earlier her friend continued to follow her in
office and further inappropriately touched her resulting in registration of
present FIR.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that incident had occurred
due to misunderstanding between the parties and petitioner expresses regret
over his inappropriate behaviour. Further no repeat incident has occurred
thereafter. He points out that disputes have been amicably settled between
the parties in terms Memorandum of Settlement dated 19.08.2023.
5. Respondent No.2 who is present in person confirms that the disputes
have been amicably settled between the parties and has no objection for
quashing of FIR.
6. Learned APP for the State submits that in view of amicable settlement
between the parties, she has no objection in case the FIR in question is
quashed.
7. Petitioner in the present case seeks to invoke the powers under Section
528 BNSS. The same is to be used to secure the ends of justice or to prevent
the abuse of process of Court. In which cases, the power to quash the
criminal proceedings or the complaint or FIR may be used when the offender
as well as victim have settled their dispute, would depend upon the facts and
circumstances of each case and no generalized list or categories can be
prescribed. However, the Court is required to give due regard to the nature
and gravity of the offence and consider the impact on the society.
8. It may also be observed that heinous and serious offences involving
mental depravity or offences such as murder, rape and dacoity cannot be
Signature Not Verified
CRL.M.C. 8091/2024 Page 2 of 4
Digitally Signed
By:DINESH CHANDRA
Signing Date:28.11.2024
16:36:22
appropriately quashed despite settlement. However, distinguished from
serious offences, the offences which have predominant element of civil
dispute or offences involving minor incidents, where the complainant /
victim also stands compensated for loss, if any, stand on a different footing,
so far as exercise of inherent powers under Section 528 BNSS is concerned.
The High Court also is not foreclosed from examining as to whether there
exists material for incorporation of such an offence or as to whether there is
sufficient evidence which if proved would lead to proving the charge for the
offence charged with. It may also be assessed, if in view of compromise
between the parties, the possibility of conviction in such a case is remote and
whether continuation of proceedings would cause grave oppression and
prejudice the accused.
9. Petitioner and respondent No. 2 are present in person and have been
identified by SI Sanyukta, PS: South Campus. I have interacted with the
parties. Respondent No.2 who is present in person confirms that the matter
has been amicably settled between them without any threat, pressure or
coercion and she has no objection in case the FIR in question is quashed.
10. Petitioner and respondent No.2 intend to put quietus to the
proceedings. The settlement shall promote harmony between the parties.
Also the chances of conviction are bleak in view of amicable settlement
between the parties.
Considering the facts and circumstances, since the matter has been
amicably settled between the parties, no useful purpose shall be served by
keeping the case pending. It would be nothing but an abuse of the process of
Court. Consequently, FIR No.0127/2018, under Sections 354/354D/506 IPC,
registered at P.S.: South Campus and proceedings emanating therefrom stand
Signature Not Verified
CRL.M.C. 8091/2024 Page 3 of 4
Digitally Signed
By:DINESH CHANDRA
Signing Date:28.11.2024
16:36:22
quashed.
11. In the facts and circumstances, instead of imposing the costs upon the
petitioner, he is directed to plant 50 saplings of Neem / Jamun trees, which
are upto 03 feet in height in the area of P.S.: South Campus after getting in
touch with the competent authority (i.e. Horticulture Department of MCD /
DDA/ Conservator of Forests, Department of Forests & Wildlife, Govt. of
NCT of Delhi) through IO / SHO, P.S.: South Campus. The photographs of
planted saplings alongwith report of IO / SHO concerned shall be forwarded
to this Court within eight weeks. Further, the upkeep of the saplings / trees
shall be undertaken by the authorities concerned. In case of non compliance
of directions for planting of trees, the petitioners shall be liable to deposit
cost of Rs. 50,000/- with the Delhi State Legal Services Authority.
Petition is accordingly disposed of. Pending applications, if any, also
stand disposed of.
A copy of this order be forwarded to learned Trial Court for
information.
ANOOP KUMAR MENDIRATTA, J
NOVEMBER 07, 2024/v
Signature Not Verified
CRL.M.C. 8091/2024 Page 4 of 4
Digitally Signed
By:DINESH CHANDRA
Signing Date:28.11.2024
16:36:22