DEEPAK CHATWAL Vs. BHOJRAJ

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ON the complaint of respondent No. 1-Bhojraj, FIR No. 770, 03 under sections 324/504/34 IPC was registered at Police Station Tilak Nagar against petitioners No. 1 and 2. However, the complainant was not satisfied with the registration of the case merely under Sections 324/504/34 IPC. Therefore, he filed an application under Section 156 (3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure before the concerned metropolitan Magistrate seeking a directior to the SHO, Police Station Tilak Nagar, to also add Sections 307/326/34 IPC to the aforesaid FIR. In the meanwhile, vide order dated May 28, 2005 charge was framed under Sections 326/504/34 IPC. After the framing of charge, petitioners and respondent No. 2 have entered into a settlement vide compromise deed dated August, 20 2006. As the charge framed against the petitioner is under sections which are not compoundable, they have moved this Court for quashing of the FIR and the proceedings arising therefrom to which respondent No. 1 who is present in Court has no objection.

(2.) HAVING regard to the above facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that no useful purpose will be served in allowing the proceedings pending in the Court of Metropolitan Magistrate Shri Puran chand at Rohini Courts, Delhi, to continue. Accordingly, I quash FIR No. 770/03 under sections 324/504/34 IPC registered at Police Station Tilak Nagar, the proceedings arising therefrom and also the application filed by the complainant under Section 156 (3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure subject to the petitioners depositing Rs. 5000/- each as cost with the Advocates Welfare Fund Trust Committee, Delhi High court, within four weeks.

(3.) THE petition is disposed of. Dasti. Petition allowed.