In a recent judgment, the Delhi High Court quashed an FIR registered against Mr. Chiraguddin for sending obscene messages, following an amicable settlement between the parties involved. The case, titled Mr. Chiraguddin vs. State Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Anr., was registered as CRL.M.C. 5683/2024. The FIR, numbered 279/2014, was initially filed on April 5, 2014, at the Paschim Vihar Police Station under Sections 509 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Section 67A of the Information Technology (IT) Act.
Legal Issues Involved
The primary legal issue in the case was whether the FIR and subsequent proceedings could be quashed following an amicable settlement between the petitioner and the complainant. The petitioner sought relief under the precedent set by the Supreme Court in Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab, which allows for the quashing of criminal proceedings if it serves no useful purpose and if the parties have settled their disputes amicably.
Court’s Decision
The judgment was delivered by Justice Subramonium Prasad on July 26, 2024. The petitioner was represented by advocates Md. Rashid, Mr. S.P. Sharma, Md. Shamin, and Ms. Nargis Jahan. The state was represented by Mr. Tarang Srivastava, Additional Public Prosecutor, while Mr. Asif Ahmad Siddique appeared for the complainant.
The court noted that both parties had entered into a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) dated April 30, 2024, to settle their disputes amicably. The complainant confirmed in court that she had settled all her disputes with the petitioner voluntarily and without any coercion, and she requested the quashing of the FIR.
Key Observations and Directions
Justice Prasad made several important observations and directions in his judgment:
1. Quashing of FIR: “In view of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab and the settlement arrived at between the parties, this Court is of the opinion that no useful purpose would be served in continuing with the present proceedings. Resultantly, the FIR No.279/2014… is hereby quashed”.
2. Costs and Community Service: The court emphasized that the petitioner should not feel that he can escape consequences merely by settling with the complainant. “The Petitioner has to atone for his sins and must realize that he cannot take the Courts for granted… This Court is, therefore, inclined to impose costs of Rs.25,000/- on the Petitioner”.
Also Read
3. Community Service: The petitioner was directed to perform community service at three different institutions for a month each:
– Jyotiba Phule Old Age Home for Senior Citizens (September 2024)
– LNJP Hospital (October 2024)
– Udayan Care-Orphanage, Mayur Vihar (November 2024)
He was also directed to plant 50 trees in his locality and nurture them.
4. Compliance and Monitoring: The court ordered that certificates of completion of community service be filed, and any default or misbehavior during the service period be reported to the court for further action.
