LAWS(DLH)-2015-9-24

SATNAM SINGH AND ORS. Vs. STATE AND ORS.

Decided On September 01, 2015
Satnam Singh And Ors. Appellant
V/S
State And Ors. Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY way of this petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, petitioners seek quashing of FIR No. 123/2012 registered at Police Station Tilak Nagar, New Delhi, Delhi, for the offences punishable under Sections 308/34 IPC and the consequential proceedings emanating therefrom against them.

(2.) LEARNED counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submits that the aforesaid case was registered on the complaint of respondent No. 2, namely, Malkhan Singh. After investigation, the police has filed the chargesheet, however, cognizance is not yet taken. The petitioner No. 1 and the respondent No. 2 are the real brothers and the remaining petitioners are sons of petitioner No. 1 and nephews of respondent No. 2. Meanwhile, with the intervention of the common friends and the respectable members of the locality, the respondent No. 2 has amicably settled their disputes with the petitioners vide Settlement dated 17.04.2015 arrived at before the Gurudwara Sri Guru Nanak Warha, Bhat Sikh Sangat (Regd.), Sham Nagar, New Delhi. It is submitted that statement of the respondent No. 2 to this effect has also been recorded on 29.05.2015 by the learned Civil Judge -III (West). Both the parties are related to each other, however, due to some confusion, cross -cases were registered against the parties. Thus, respondent No. 2 has no objection if the present petition is allowed. Copy of the aforementioned settlement is annexed to the present petition as Annexure B.

(3.) LEARNED Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the State submits that though chargesheet has been filed by the police, however, case is at the initial stage as cognizance is yet to be taken. Since the parties have amicably settled the matter and the respondent No. 2/complainant does not wish to pursue the case further against the petitioners, therefore, looking to the overall circumstances, no useful purpose will be served in continuing the proceedings. Thus, the State has no objection if the present petition is allowed.