Manoj & Anr. Vs.state & Anr

Manoj & Anr. vs State & Anr

Type Court Judgment Court Delhi Decided Oct 10, 2018

~3 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1218627

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/1218627
Court: Delhi High Court
Decided On: Oct 10, 2018
Subject: Criminal

Case Summary

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

Criminal

Key legal issue: Criminal

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Manoj & Anr.

Respondent

State & Anr

Excerpt

.....apologised to the respondent no.2 and she has accepted the apology.4. parties are neighbours. the petitioners have expressed remorse and regretted their conduct and undertake that they shall not repeat the same in future. the undertakings are accepted.5. respondent no.2 is present in court in person and is identified by the investigating officer. she submits that she has settled the disputes with the petitioners and does not wish to prosecute the complaint any further and has no objection to the quashing of the subject fir.6. in view of the fact that the parties have resolved their disputes and respondent no.2 does not wish to press her 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 there from.7. in view of the above, the petition is allowed. fir no.31/2017 under sections 354/323/325/341/5ipc, police station okhla indl. area and the consequent proceedings emanating there from are crl.m.c. 5209/2018 page 2 of 3 quashed, subject to the petitioners’ depositing a consolidated cost of rs.10,000/- with the “chief minister’s distress relief fund (cmdrf), kerala”, within a period of two weeks from today. receipt of deposit of the costs imposed by this order be furnished to the concerned investigating officer within a period of three weeks from today.8. order dasti under the signatures of the court master. october10 2018 ‘rs’ sanjeev sachdeva, j crl.m.c. 5209/2018 page 3 of 3

Full Judgment

$~54 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + CRL.M.C. 5209/2018 Judgment delivered on:10.10.2018 MANOJ & ANR. ........ Petitioner

s STATE & ANR versus ........ RESPONDENTS

Advocates who appeared in this case: Mr. Sushil Kr. Jain, Adv. For the... Petitioner

: For the... RESPONDENTS

: CORAM:-

"HON’BLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA Mr. Raghuvinder Verma, Addl. PP for the State with SI Kamal Kumar JUDGMENT1010.2018 SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.

(ORAL) 1.... Petitioner

s seek quashing of FIR No.31/2017 under Sections 354/323/325/341/5
IPC, Police Station Okhla Indl. Area, based on a settlement.

2. The allegations in the FIR are that the prosecutrix had gone to shop to purchase certain articles and the petitioners under influence of alcohol misbehaved with her. CRL.M.C. 5209/2018 Page 1 of 3 3. Learned counsel for the parties submits that parties have settled their disputes with the intervention of residents of the locality and petitioners have apologised to the respondent No.2 and she has accepted the apology.

4. Parties are neighbours. The petitioners have expressed remorse and regretted their conduct and undertake that they shall not repeat the same in future. The undertakings are accepted.

5. Respondent No.2 is present in Court in person and is identified by the Investigating Officer. She submits that she has settled the disputes with the petitioners and does not wish to prosecute the complaint any further and has no objection to the quashing of the subject FIR.

6. In view of the fact that the parties have resolved their disputes and respondent No.2 does not wish to press her 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 there from.

7. In view of the above, the petition is allowed. FIR No.31/2017 under Sections 354/323/325/341/5
IPC, Police Station Okhla Indl. Area and the consequent proceedings emanating there from are CRL.M.C. 5209/2018 Page 2 of 3 quashed, subject to the petitioners’ depositing a consolidated cost of Rs.10,000/- with the “Chief Minister’s Distress Relief Fund (CMDRF), Kerala”, within a period of two weeks from today. Receipt of deposit of the costs imposed by this Order be furnished to the concerned Investigating Officer within a period of three weeks from today.

8. Order Dasti under the signatures of the Court Master. OCTOBER10 2018 ‘rs’ SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J CRL.M.C. 5209/2018 Page 3 of 3

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