Delhi High Court quashes FIR on a unique condition to assist Traffic Police at traffic signal for 30 days

The Court opined that as parties have amicably settled their disputes, no useful purpose shall be served in continuing with proceedings of the present FIR as it will create further acrimony between the parties.

Delhi High Court

Delhi High Court: The present petition was filed under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (‘CrPC’) seeking quashing of FIR registered at Police Station Preet Vihar, East Delhi under Sections 354, 506, and 509 of the Penal Code, 1860, along with all other proceedings arising therefrom, based on a settlement. Navin Chawla, J., quashed the FIR, subject to the condition that petitioner should assist the Traffic Police at a traffic signal where he might be deputed by the DCP Traffic, East District, for 30 days.

Counsel for petitioner submitted that the parties had amicably settled their inter se disputes and had entered into a settlement vide settlement dated 21-3-2022 before the Delhi Mediation Centre, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi. Respondent 2 reaffirmed the settlement and stated that she had settled all the disputes with petitioner out of her own free will and without any coercion and submitted that she had no objection if the present FIR was quashed.

The Court opined that as Respondent 2 did not wish to pursue her complaint any further, and also the settlement arrived at between the parties, thus no useful purpose shall be served in continuing with the proceedings of the present FIR as it would create further acrimony between the parties and would be an unnecessary burden on the State exchequer.

The Court relied on Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, (2012) 10 SCC 303; Parbatbhai Aahir v. State of Gujarat, (2017) 9 SCC 641 and State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335, and opined that it deemed appropriate, in the interest of justice, to exercise its inherent powers under Section 482 of CrPC to quash the FIR and all the proceedings emanating therefrom.

The Court thus allowed the petition and quashed the FIR and all consequential proceedings emanating therefrom against petitioner, subject to the condition that petitioner should assist the Traffic Police at a traffic signal where he might be deputed by the DCP Traffic, East District, for 30 days. Petitioner should report to the DCP Traffic for rendering the assistance at a traffic signal assigned to him. The Court directed that at the end of 30 days, the DCP Traffic should issue a certificate to petitioner, which petitioner should thereafter file before this Court within a period of two months from the date of this order and if such a certificate was not filed, the Registry should place this matter before this Court for further directions.

[Vikas Bohat v. State (NCT of Delhi), Crl. M.C. 6927 of 2022, Order dated 16-4-2024]


Advocates who appeared in this case :

For the Petitioner: Nitesh Mehra, Angel Bhardwaj, Sanjeev Vashisht, Hitaakshi Mehra, Hazel Bhardwaj, Nipun Gupta, Harsh Gupta, Advocates

For the Respondents: Aman Usman, APP; SI Mukesh, Preet Vihar; Respondent 2 present through VC

Buy Penal Code, 1860   HERE

penal code, 1860

Buy Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973  HERE

Code of Criminal Procedure

Join the discussion

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *