#48 % 27.08.2010 Present: Mr.Vimal Puggal, Advocate for the petitioner with petitioner in person. Mr. Pawan Sharma, Standing counsel with Ms. Laxmi Chauhan, Advocate with SI Ajit Kumar, P.S. Bhajanpura. Mr.Nasir Ali, Advocate for the respondent Nos. 2 and 3 with respondent Nos. 2 and 3 in person. +Crl.M.A. 14183/2010 (exemption) Allowed subject to all just exceptions. Application stands disposed of. W.P.(Crl.) No. 1271/2010 This is a petition .under Article 226 of Constitution read with Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of FIR No. 252/2009 under Section 304A IPC registered at P.S. Bhajanpura on the complaint of the respondent No. 2/complainant Prakash Narayan. The ground for seeking quashing is that the parties have arrived at an ,_' Jt. amicable settlement. Petitioner Mukesh Kumar Gera as well as the respondent No. 2 Parkash Narayan and respondent No. 3 Smt. Bal Koslya Devijwife of the deceased are present in person. Petitioner is identified by his counsel Mr. Vimal Puggal, Advocate. Respondent No. 3 is identified by her counsel Mr. Nasir Ali, Advocate as also the complainant Parkash Narayan. As per the FIR, the deceased who was employed as a mason by the complainant Parkash Narayan, on the fateful day, while washing utensils on the 'chajjha/balcony' (Projection) on the first floor of the house belonging to 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 the petitioner, deceased slipped from the 'chajjha' and fell on the electric cable. Consequently, he was electrocuted and expired. Petitioner as well as respondent No. 3 submit that they have settled the matter amicably and now, there is no dispute left between them. Respondent No. 3 states that she has arrived at an amicable settlement with the petitioner without any influence or pressure and she does not want any action against the petitioner on the FIR No. 252/2009 registered at P.S. Bhajanpura pertaining to the death of her husband on the complaint of the respondent No. 2. She also states that pursuant to the compromise today, she has received two bank drafts for a sum of Rs. 49,999/- each bearing Nos. 960752 & 960753 ·both dated 27th August, 2010 drawn at UCO Bank, Delhi High Court Branch against the balance payment in terms of the settlement arrived at with the petitioner. She also confirms that earlier she has received a sum of Rs. 20,000/- and has received today a sum of Rs. 5000/- in cash. Respondent No. 1, the complainant, also states that smce the petitioner has compensated the respondent No. 3 for the death of her husband, he does not want any action on the FIR registered on his complaint. Learned APP for the State submits that in v1ew of the settlement arrived at between the parties, the State has no objection if the instant FIR as well as proceedings arising out of the same ·are quashed. Taking into account the allegations in the FIR and the fact that the parties have arrived at an amicable settlement, I find no reason to keep the FIR and the proceedings arising out of the same pending. Accordingly, FIR -. ,.. No. 252/2009 under Section 304A IPC registered at P.S. Bhajanpura and the proceedings emanating from the same are quashed. Petition is disposed of accordingly. AUGUST 27, 2010 akb AJIT BHARIHOKE (JUDGE)