Suraj vs.state & Anr.

Suraj vs State & Anr.

Type Court Judgment Court Delhi Decided Aug 21, 2018

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1217185

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1217185
Court: Delhi High Court
Decided On: Aug 21, 2018
Subject: Criminal

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Criminal

Key legal issue: Criminal

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Suraj

Respondent

State & Anr.

Excerpt

.....the families crl.m.c. 2307/2018 page 1 of 2 consequent to which injuries were sustained.4. it is contended on behalf of the parties that the parties have settled their disputes. parties were referred to mediation. parties have settled their disputes through the process of mediation through mediation centre, saket courts on 01.04.2017. as per the settlement, the petitioner was to pay a sum of rs.16,000/- to respondent no.2. it is confirmed that the said amount has already been paid.5. respondent no.2 is present in court in person, represented by counsel and identified by the investigating officer. she submits that she has resolved her disputes and is agreeable to the settlement and does not wish to press the criminal charges any further.6. in view of the fact that the disputes between the parties have been settled, continuation of criminal proceedings will be an exercise in futility and justice in the case demands that the dispute between the parties is put to an end and peace is restored; securing the ends of justice being the ultimate guiding factor. it would be expedient to quash the subject fir and the consequent proceedings emanating therefrom.7. in view of the above, the petition is allowed. fir no.554/2014 under sections 323/341/354d/5ipc, police station jaitpur and the consequent proceedings emanating there from are quashed.8. order dasti under signatures of the court master. august21 2018/rk crl.m.c. 2307/2018 sanjeev sachdeva, j page 2 of 2

Full Judgment

$~23 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + CRL.M.C. 2307/2018 & CRL.M.A. 8193/2018 Judgment delivered on:

21. 08.2018 ........ Petitioner

........ RESPONDENTS

SURAJ versus STATE & ANR. Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioner

: For the Respondent: Mr.Gaurav Gupta, Advocate. Ms.Neelam Sharma APP for the State with SI Soamya Kulhar, P.S.Jaitpur. Mr.N.L.Suman, Adv. CORAM:-

"HON’BLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA JUDGMENT2108.2018 SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.

(ORAL) 1. The petitioner seeks quashing of FIR No.554/2014 under Sections 323/341/354D/5
IPC, Police Station Jaitpur.

2. At the request of learned counsel for the petitioner, Ms. Komal, the sister of respondent No.2 is impleaded as respondent No.3. Amended Memo of parties has already been filed. Respondent Nos.2 & 3 are present in Court.

3. The parties are neighbours. Subject FIR was registered on the allegation that the petitioner proposed to the respondent No.2/complainant even after she had got married which led to a quarrel between the families CRL.M.C. 2307/2018 Page 1 of 2 consequent to which injuries were sustained.

4. It is contended on behalf of the parties that the parties have settled their disputes. Parties were referred to mediation. Parties have settled their disputes through the process of mediation through Mediation Centre, Saket Courts on 01.04.2017. As per the settlement, the petitioner was to pay a sum of Rs.16,000/- to respondent No.2. It is confirmed that the said amount has already been paid.

5. Respondent No.2 is present in court in person, represented by counsel and identified by the Investigating Officer. She submits that she has resolved her disputes and is agreeable to the settlement and does not wish to press the criminal charges any further.

6. In view of the fact that the disputes between the parties have been settled, continuation of criminal proceedings will be an exercise in futility and justice in the case demands that the dispute between the parties is put to an end and peace is restored; securing the ends of justice being the ultimate guiding factor. It would be expedient to quash the subject FIR and the consequent proceedings emanating therefrom.

7. In view of the above, the petition is allowed. FIR No.554/2014 under Sections 323/341/354D/5
IPC, Police Station Jaitpur and the consequent proceedings emanating there from are quashed.

8. Order Dasti under signatures of the Court Master. AUGUST21 2018/rk CRL.M.C. 2307/2018 SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J Page 2 of 2

Same Court & Year Delhi · 2018 Same Parties Suraj vs State & Anr. Same Subject Criminal