+2,43 e rT. o/o 26.11.2OO9 Present : Mr.V.K. Malik, Adv. for the petitioner. Mr. Jaideep Malik, APP for the State. Crl.M.C. Nos. 1O51 t2OO8 and Crl. M.A. No. 3892/2009 (stayl 1. Mr. V. K. Malik, the learned counsel for the petitioner in Crl. M.C. no. 1051 /2OO8 seeks permission to withdraw the petition on the ground that the matter has been settled and two separate petitions for quashing of the FIR on the basis of a compromise have been filed. The learned APP does not have any objection. Accordingly, Crl. M.C. No. 105I l2OO8 is dismissed as withdrawn. Crl.M.C. Nos. 4O54|2OO9 and 4O55/2OO9 These are two petitions for quashing of two cross FIRs bearing no. gg /2OO8 under Section g23 I 34IPC read with section 3 of the SC/ ST Act registered at P.S. Bawana, Delhi on the basis of a complaint purported to have alleged by Surender Kumar, MLA against the six persons namely Narain Singh, Rajiv, Shyam Singh, Rajesh S/o Chander Singh, Rajesh & Raj Kumar both sons of Kali Ram. The cross FIR has been registered at the instance of Narain Siirgh against the Surender Kumar, Virender Kumar and Vijay Kumar bearing no. 100/2008 under Section 3241325134 IPC registered at the same police station. The dispute which had arisen between the two rival groups was on account of inauguration of a stretch of a road \r 1. I 'G 2. ,t& 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 i' 3. which was newly carpeted. Both the rival political workers wanted to take credit for getting the road carpeted which resulted in th; " unsavory incident. Both the parties are present in Court and identified by their respective counsels. Narain singh, Rajiv, shyam singh, Rajesh s/o chander singh, Rajesh & Raj Kumar both sons of Kali Ram are identified by Mr. v. K. Malik and surender Kumar, Virender Kumar and vijay Kumar are identified by sh. A. K. singh. The affidavits of both the accused persons and the complainant in their respective cases are on record in the respective cases. In addition to this, in crl. M.c. no. 40s5 l2oog affidavits of Rajesh Kumar, shyam singh, surender Kumar, Rajesh Kumar s/o Kali Ram, Raj Kumar s/o Kali Ram, who are not the complainants with regard to FIR No. 100/2oog have also been placed on record in the capacity of witnesses. On inquiry, both the parties have stated that they have settled their dispute amicably and do not want to pursue the FIRs lodged by the respective sides against the rival group and pray for quashing of both the FIRs and consequent investigation carried out by the local police. Mr. Pawan Bahl, the learned App who is present in response to the advance copy does not have any objection in case the FIRs are quashed. In the light of the facts that the parties have settled their disputes. since the dispute essentially pertains in the nature of private dispute between the parties which seems to have arisen on 4. 'l 5. a \ -_/ to take J account of the fact that each of the rival group wanted the credit for getting road carpeted and thus wanted to score a point over the other, I feer that since the parties have resorved the dispute and no useful purpose wourd be served by keeping the cross FIRs no. 99 / 2oo8 under Section 32s / g4 Ipc read with section 3 of the sc/ sr Act registered at P.S. Bawana, Delhi and 100/ 2OOg under Section 324 /325 /34 rpc registered at the same porice station as pending. Accordingly, the FIRs no. 99l2oog under section g23/s4lpc read with section 3 of the sc/sr Act registered at p.s. Bawana, Delhi and 7oo/2oo8 under Section 924/32s/34 rpc registered. at the same police station and the consequent proceedings are quashed. However, this shall be subject to both the parties namely namely Narain singh, Rajiv, shyam singh, Rajesh s/o chander singh, Rajesh & Raj Kumar both sons of Kali Ram and surender Kumar, virender Kumar and vijay Kumar each shall and deposit a sum of Rs.10,000/_ with the Delhi High Court Lawyers Welfare Fund within two weeks. A copy of the deposit receipt along with the written intimation will be filed in the court. In case the aforesaid amount is not deposited the IO shall proceed ahead. Dasti. V.K.SHALI, J. .a i. T-r 6. NOVEMBER 26, 2OOg KP