-i. J 11. * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRLM.C. 3983/2010 and CrLM.A. 18911/2010 CHHUTKAN SHARMA & ORS Petitioners Through: Mr. Suresh Bharti, Advocate with petitioners in person. versus STATE &i^l\lR Respondents Through: Mr. Sunil Sharma, APP for the State l^r. R.S. I^ishra, Advocate for respondent No.2. CORAM: HON'BLE |V|S. JUSTICE HI|V|A KOHLI ORDER % 23.12.2010 1. The present petition is filed by the petitioners under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. praying inter alia for quashing of FIR No.194/2010 lodged by respondent No.2/complainant against the petitioners under Sections 451/323/34 IPC, registered with Police Station: Palam Village, New Delhi. 2. It is stated by the counsel for the petitioners that petitioners No.2 and 3 were inducted as a tenant by the husband of respondent No.2/complainant. It is the case of the petitioners that disputes and differences arose between the parties on account of non payment of rent of the tenanted premises. On the date of incident, CRL.M.C. 3983/2010 Page 1 of 4 Signing Date:05.08.2024 16:58:50 Certify that the digital and physical file have been compared and the digital data is as per the physical file and no page is missing. Signature Not Verified i.e., on 30.01.2010, heated words were exchanged between the parties, which resulted in physical assault on respondent No.2/complainant by the petitioners. 3. Counsel for the petitioners states that on 7.9.2010, during the hearing of an anticipatory bail application filed by the petitioners, the Court directed the parties to explore the possibility of arriving at a negotiated settlement. Pursuant to the same, the parties appeared before the Delhi High Court Mediation and Conciliation Centre and >v -r arrived at a settlement, as recorded in the Report dated 15.9.2010 submitted by the learned Mediator (Annexure B). 4. It is submitted by the counsels for the parties that both the parties have resolved their intense disputes and petitioners No.2 and 3 have vacated the tenanted premises and handed over vacant peaceful I possession thereof to the husband of respondent No.2/complainant. Both the parties have also agreed to withdraw all the complaints filed against each other. 5. Though respondent No.2/complainant is not present in J Court, she is represented by her counsel, who states that he has filed his power of attorney on the record. He submits that respondent No.2/complainant has filed an affidavit dated 13.12.2010 alongwith CRL.M.C.3983/2010 2 of 4 the present petition stating inter alia that she has arrived at a settlement with the petitioners of her own free will and volition and without any undue influence or coercion from any quarter and that she has no objection to the FIR being quashed. He further explains the absence of respondent No.2/complainant by submitting that she had left her residence this morning to reach the Court, but on her way, she met with an accident, due to which, she had to be rushed to the hospital. 6. Learned APP for the State submits that the matter is at the stage of investigation. However, in view of the settlement arrived at between the parties, he has no objection to the prayer made in the present petition being allowed. 7. This Court has heard the counsels for the parties. In view of the submission made by the counsel for respondent No.2/compIainant and in view of the fact that the parties have arrived at a settlement of their own free will and volition and without any undue influence or coercion from any quarter, no useful purpose will be served by proceeding further with the aforesaid FIR and the proceedings arising therefrom. CRL.M.C.3983/2010 3 of 4 8. Accordingly, the prayer made in the petition is allowed. FIR No.194/2010, lodged by respondent No.2/complainant with Police Station: Palam Village, and ail proceedings arising therefrom are quashed qua the petitioners. 9. The petition is disposed of, alongwith the pending application. File be consigned to the record room. HIMA KOHLI,J ^ DECEMBER 23, 2010 rkb 1 J CRL.M.C.3983/2010 Paffe 4 of 4 u