LAWS(DLH)-2015-10-394

AMIT SINGH Vs. STATE AND ANOTHER

Decided On October 05, 2015
AMIT SINGH Appellant
V/S
State And Another Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present petition under Sec. 482 Crimial P.C. has been filed by the petitioner, namely, Amit Singh for quashing of FIR No. 328/2013 dated 03.10.2013, under Sections 23 and 26 of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 registered at Police Station Fatehpur Beri, New Delhi in which the complainant is the Child Welfare Committee, Lajpat Nagar, Delhi on the basis of settlement deed arrived at between the petitioner and respondent No. 2/Sh.Amresh Poddar, father of the minor child Rohan at Delhi on 20.01.2014 and the statement of the respondent No. 2.

(2.) Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent-State submitted that the respondent No. 2, present in the Court has been identified to be the father of the minor child Roshan by SI Arun Kumar.

(3.) Respondent No. 2, present in the Court, submitted that the dispute between the parties has been amicably resolved as the Labour authorities had ordered the petitioner to pay the amounts of Rs.61,000.00 and Rs.20,000.00 which has been already paid by the petitioner to the respondent no. 2 in compliance of the order. Respondent no.2 has no grievances against the petitioner as he has been helping the entire family of respondent no.2. The respondent no.2 clarifies and states that his minor son Roshan was never working as a child labour with the petitioner and was sent to Delhi for studies. Respondent No. 2 affirms the contents of the aforesaid compromise deed and of his affidavit dated 24.01.2014 supporting this petition. All the disputes and differences have been resolved through mutual consent. Now no dispute with petitioner survives and so, the proceedings arising out of the FIR in question be brought to an end. Statement of the respondent No. 2 has been recorded in this regard in which he stated that he has entered into a compromise with the petitioner and has settled all the disputes with him. He further stated that he has no objection if the FIR in question is quashed.