#1 29.03.2011 Present: Petitioners in person with Mr. Prasad, Advocate. Petitioner No.3 in person with Mr. K.B. Thakur, Advocate. Ms. Santosh Kohli, APP for the State/respondent along with 10 51 Rajbir Singh. P.S. Greater Kailash-1. +Cri.M.C. No.883/2011 & Cri.M.A. No.3305/2011(stay) ' Petitioners No.1 & 2 are the accused persons and petitioner No.3 Rajiv Nair is the complainant. This is a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of FIR No.184/2009 under Section 308 P.S. Greater Kailash-1. Briefly stated, case of the prosecution is that in the night of 21.11.2009, the petitioners were taking drinks in House No.C-50, Greater Kailash-1, New Delhi. Late in the night, petitioner No.1 Ankesh @ Sonu asked injured Rajiv Nair to bring some liquor. Rajiv Nair refused to accede to the request and this resulted in a scuffle resulting in head injury to the victim Rajiv Nair. Petitioner No.3/complainant was admitted in the hospital. Petitioners No.1 and 2 are present. They are identified by their counsel Mr. Abhishek Prasad, Advocate. Petitioner No.3/complainant is present. He is identified by his counsel Mr. K.B. Thakur, Advocate as well as by 10 51 Rajbir Singh, P.S. Greater Kailash-1. Digitally Signed By:AMULYA Certify that the digital file and physical file have been compared and the digital data is as per the physical file and no page is missing. Signature Not Verified • • It is submitted on behalf of the petitioners that the occurrence took place suddenly on flimsy ground and there was no intention on the part of petitioners No.1 and 2 to cause any injury to complainant/petitioner No.3. It is submitted that the petitioners are friends and they have amicably settled the matter and there is no dispute left between them and petitioner No.3 does not want any action against petitioners No.1 and 2 in respect of the aforesaid incident which is subject matter of FIR No.184/2009 P.S. Greater Kailash-1. Petitioner No.3 Rajiv Nair submits that petitioners No.1 & 2 are his friends. The incident was a result of misunderstanding and friendly scuffle. He further submits that he has amicably settled the matter with petitioners No.1 & 2 in interest of harmonious friendly relations and he does not want any action against petitioners No.1 & 2 on the basis of FIR no.184/2009 registered in respect of injuries sustained by him. He further submits that he has no objection if the FIR and the proceedings emanating thereform are quashed. Learned Ms. Santosh Kohli, APP appearing on behalf of the State, on the contrary, is opposing the FIR on the ground that the charge sheet has already been filed and petitioners No.1 & 2 have been named as accused under Section 308/34 IPC. I have considered the rival contentions. As per the charge sheet and the statement of petitioner No.3, it is apparent that the incident took place suddenly without any intention or motive on the part of the petitioners No.1 & 2 to cause injuries to petitioner No.3. The cause of the scuffle was refusal of petitioner No.3 to bring more liquor. There is no record of previous conviction against either petitioner No.1 or petitioner No.2, who are young persons. Taking into account the above facts and the fact that parties have • amicably settled the matter, in my view, no useful purpose shall be served by prosecuting the petitioners No.1 and 2 on the basis of the FIR No.184/2009 P.S. Greater Kailash-1. Accordingly, the FIR No.184/2009 under Section 308 IPC P.S. Greater Kailash-1 and the proceedings arising out of the same are quashed. Petition stands disposed of. Order Dasti. MARCH 29, 2011 pst jy· (AJIT BHARIHOKE) JUDGE