Sunil Kumar @ Sonu vs.state (Govt. Of Nct of Delhi) & Anr.

Sunil Kumar @ Sonu vs State (Govt. Of Nct of Delhi) & Anr.

Type Court Judgment Court Delhi Decided Feb 07, 2019

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1221239

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/1221239
Court: Delhi High Court
Decided On: Feb 07, 2019
Subject: Criminal

Case Summary

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

Criminal

Key legal issue: Criminal

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Sunil Kumar @ Sonu

Respondent

State (Govt. Of Nct of Delhi) & Anr.

Excerpt

.....through: mr. vikash kumar, mr. rohit singh & mr. manoj kumar, advocates versus state (govt of nct of delhi) & anr. ........ respondents through: mr. m.s.oberoi, additional public prosecutor for the state coram: hon'ble mr. justice sunil gaur order (oral) quashing of f.i.r. no.13/2019, under sectionsof 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. supreme court in parbatbhai aahir @ parbatbhai bhimsinhbhai vs. state of gujarat (2017) 9 scc641has 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 crl.m.c. 704/2019 page 1 of 2 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.” 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. no case for quashing of fir in question is made out. this petition and application are accordingly dismissed while not commenting upon the merits of the case. (sunil gaur) judge february07 2019 r crl.m.c. 704/2019.....

Full Judgment

* + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Order: February 07, 2019 CRL.M.C. 704/2019 & Crl.M.A. 2887/2019 SUNIL KUMAR @ SONU ........ Petitioner

Through: Mr. Vikash Kumar, Mr. Rohit Singh & Mr. Manoj Kumar, Advocates Versus STATE (GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI) & ANR. ........ RESPONDENTS

Through: Mr. M.S.Oberoi, Additional Public Prosecutor for the State CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR ORDER

(ORAL) Quashing of F.I.R. No.13/2019, under Sections
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. Supreme Court in Parbatbhai Aahir @ Parbatbhai Bhimsinhbhai Vs. State of Gujarat (2017) 9 SCC641has 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 Crl.M.C. 704/2019 Page 1 of 2 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.” 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. No case for quashing of FIR in question is made out. This petition and application are accordingly dismissed while not commenting upon the merits of the case. (SUNIL GAUR) JUDGE FEBRUARY07 2019 r Crl.M.C. 704/2019 Page 2 of 2

Same Court & Year Delhi · 2019 Same Parties Sunil Kumar @ Sonu vs State (Govt. Of Nct of Delhi) & Anr. Same Subject Criminal