23 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. 1488/2010 0/o 1. HARISH CHAND ..... Petitioner Through : Mr. Rahul Khurana, Adv. with petitioner in person. versus GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR. . .... Respondents CORAM: Through : Mr. Naveen Sharma, APP for State with Investigating Officer. Respondent No.2/complainant in person. HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI ORDER 28.10.2010 The present petition is filed by the petitioner under Section 482 Cr.P.C. praying inter alia for quashing of FIR No.189/2006 lodged by the respondent No.2/complainant against the petitioner, under Sections 381/411 IPC with PS Seemapuri, Delhi and all proceedings arising therefrom. 2. Counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner was employed at the factory of the respondent No.2/complainant and on • 22.3.2006, the respondent No.2/complainant found cash to the tune of 70,000/- missing from the office. Thereupon, he lodged the aforesaid FIR against the petitioner. In the course of investigation, the CRL.M.C. 1488/2010 Page 1 of 3 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 petitioner was arrested. Thereafter, investigations were completed and charge sheet has been filed, but the prosecution evidence has yet to be recorded. 3. In the meantime, the petitioner approached the respondent No.2/complainant and sought to resolve their interse disputes by tendering an apology to him and returning the sum of The petitioner therefore submits that the present FIR be quashed. 4. The respondent No.2/complainant, who is present in person and is identified by the counsel for the petitioner, confirms the fact that seeing the young age of the petitioner and the fact that he is ·repentant, he has decided to forgive him. He further states that the petitioner has returned the sum 70,000/- to him and in this view of the matter, he does not wish that any further action be taken against the petitioner in the FIR lodged by him. 5. Learned APP for the State, on instruction from the IO, confirms the fact that the parties have arrived at a settlement. He, therefore, does not oppose the prayer made in the present petition. 6. This Court has heard counsels for the parties. In view of the submission made by the respondent No.2/complainant 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 CRL.M.C. 1488/2010 Page 2 of 3 from any quarters, no useful . purpose will be served by proceeding further with the aforesaid FIR and the proceedings arising therefrom. 7. Accordingly, the prayer made in the petition is allowed and FIR No.189/2006 lodged by the respondent No.2jcomplainant with PS Seemapuri, De.lhi and all proceedings arising therefrom stand quashed. 8. The petition is disposed of. File be consigned to the record room. OCTOBER 28, 2010 sk CRL.M.C. 1488/2010 I I I ' ' i I I ' HIMA KOHLI,J Page 3 of 3 5