Delhi HC Quashes Two FIRs Against 24 Individuals Involved In A Fight, Directs Cleaning Of Police Stations For 3 Days
|The Delhi High Court disposed of two Writ Petitions filed by neighbors against each other over a scuffle registered under Sections 147/148/149/323/341/308/427/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
The Court directed the involved parties to undertake police station cleaning work for three days. The Petitions had submitted a compromise deed and sought to quash the FIR filed against them.
The Bench of Justice Saurabh Banerjee, in both the Petitions, observed, “all proceeding emanating therefrom are quashed with the directions to all the named 24 parties involved herein, consisting of the petitioner nos.1 to 6 and respondent nos.2 to 19, that all of them would divide themselves in 4 groups of 6 persons each who would undertake basic cleaning work for 3 days i.e. on Monday, Thursday and Sunday of the week commencing from 18.09.2023 at the below-mentioned 4 Police Stations namely Mehrauli, Fatehpur Beri, Maidan Garhi and Neb Sarai to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer concerned”.
Advocate Vipin Sehrawat Appeared for Petitioner no 1 (Sagar), Advocate Manoj Godara appeared for Petitioner no 2 (Abhishek), and Additional Standing Counsel Rupali Bandhopadhya appeared for the State/ Respondents.
Two Writ Petitions were filed before the Court seeking to quash the FIR under Sections 308 and 34 of the IPC. Petitioners no 1 and 2 were neighbours and had filed FIRs against each other over a riot following a scuffle. The Petitioners had submitted a compromise deed. The Respondents also submitted to the Court that they did not wish to pursue the criminal proceedings against the Petitioners and had no objection to quashing the FIRs.
The Court directed all 24 parties herein, consisting of Petitioners no. 1 to 6 and Respondents no. 2 to 19, to undertake basic cleaning work for three days commencing September 18.
Accordingly, the Court disposed of the Petitions.
Cause Title: Sagar & Ors v. State (N.C.T. of Delhi) & Ors. And Abhishek & Ors v State & Ors.