Sunil Kumar vs.state & Ors

Sunil Kumar vs State & Ors

Type Court Judgment Court Delhi Decided Aug 28, 2018

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1217392

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/1217392
Court: Delhi High Court
Decided On: Aug 28, 2018
Subject: Land Acquisition

Case Summary

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

Land Acquisition

Key legal issue: Land Acquisition

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Sunil Kumar

Respondent

State & Ors

Excerpt

.....allegation was that the crl.m.c. 3622/2018 page 1 of 2 petitioner had incorrectly parked the vehicle and when the complainant objected, it led to a quarrel and consequent injuries were sustained. parties live in the same locality.3. learned counsel for the petitioner submits that with the intervention of the friends and family, the parties have amicably resolved their disputes and a settlement deed dated 29.06.2018 has been executed between the parties.4. the respondent no.2 is present in court and is identified by the investigating officer. he submits that he has settled his disputes with the petitioner and does not wish to prosecute the complaint any further and has no objection to the quashing of the subject fir.5. in view of the fact that the parties have resolved their disputes and respondent no.2 does not wish to press his complaint, 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.6. in view of the above, the petition is allowed. fir no.137/2017 under sections 323/341/452/3ipc, police station nabi karim and the consequent proceedings emanating there from are quashed. order dasti under the signatures of the court master.7. august28 2018/st crl.m.c. 3622/2018 sanjeev sachdeva, j page 2 of 2

Full Judgment

$~2 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + CRL.M.C. 3622/2018 Judgment delivered on:

28. 08.2018 SUNIL KUMAR versus STATE & ORS ........ Petitioner

........ RESPONDENTS

Advocates who appeared in this case: For the... Petitioner

s : For the... RESPONDENTS

: Mr. Sameer Bhatnagar with Ms. Charuvi Sharma, Advocates Mr. Sanjeev Sabharwal, APP for the State. SI Vivek, PS Nabi Karim. Complainant in person. CORAM:-

"HON’BLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA JUDGMENT2808.2018 SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.

(ORAL) Crl.M.A. 28314/2018 (exemption) Exemption is allowed subject to all just exceptions. CRL.M.C. 3622/2018 1.... Petitioner

seeks quashing of FIR No.137/2017 under Sections 323/341/4
IPC (subsequently, Section 325 IPC has been added), Police Station Nabi Karim.

2. The subject FIR was registered consequent to a dispute between the parties with regard to parking of a vehicle. The allegation was that the CRL.M.C. 3622/2018 Page 1 of 2 petitioner had incorrectly parked the vehicle and when the complainant objected, it led to a quarrel and consequent injuries were sustained. Parties live in the same locality.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that with the intervention of the friends and family, the parties have amicably resolved their disputes and a Settlement Deed dated 29.06.2018 has been executed between the parties.

4. The respondent No.2 is present in Court and is identified by the Investigating Officer. He submits that he has settled his disputes with the petitioner and does not wish to prosecute the complaint any further and has no objection to the quashing of the subject FIR.

5. In view of the fact that the parties have resolved their disputes and respondent No.2 does not wish to press his complaint, 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.

6. In view of the above, the petition is allowed. FIR No.137/2017 under Sections 323/341/452/3
IPC, Police Station Nabi Karim and the consequent proceedings emanating there from are quashed. Order Dasti under the signatures of the Court Master.

7. AUGUST28 2018/st CRL.M.C. 3622/2018 SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J Page 2 of 2

Same Court & Year Delhi · 2018 Same Parties Sunil Kumar vs State & Ors Same Subject Land Acquisition