SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Pradeep Jindal vs State & Anr on 2 March, 2020

+ CRL.M.C. 1174/2020
PRADEEP JINDAL ….. Petitioner
Through: Mr. Chirag Khurana, Advocate
alongwith petitioner in person
STATE ANR. ….. Respondents
Through: Dr. M.P. Singh, APP for State with ASI
Jitendra Singh, P.S. Model Town
Respondent No. 2 in person

% 02.03.2020
CRL.M.A. 4582/2020 (Exemption)

1. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

2. The application stands disposed of.

CRL.M.C. 1174/2020

1. The present proceedings are instituted seeking quashing of FIR No.
37/2016 under Section 354 IPC registered at Police Station Model Town,
Delhi on the ground of settlement having been arrived at between the

2. As per the case of the prosecution, the present FIR was registered at
the instance of respondent No. 2 as she alleged that she was tortured and
sexually assaulted by the petitioner.

3. Learned APP for the State submits that the charge sheet in the present
case has been filed against the present petitioner and respondent No. 2 is the
only complainant/victim. It is stated that the petitioner is the father-in-law
of respondent No. 2.

CRL.M.C. 1174/2020 Page 1 of 3

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the parties have
entered into a settlement vide compromise deed dated 18.01.2020. A copy of
the same is annexed with the petition as Annexure-A (colly). In terms of the
settlement, respondent no.2 is now left with no claim whatsoever against the

5. The petitioner who is present in person, is identified by his counsel
and the Investigating Officer. Respondent No.2, who is also present in
person, is identified by the Investigating Officer. The petitioner has shown
remorse for his conduct and has undertaken not to repeat the same in future.

6. Respondent no. 2 states that she has entered into the settlement with
the petitioner out of her own free will, volition and without any undue force,
pressure or coercion. She further states that the petitioner has not repeated
the same incident and she has no objection if the present FIR and consequent
proceedings are quashed.

7. Learned counsels for the parties submit that no other proceedings are
pending between the parties.

8. The parties shall remain bound by their statements made in Court

9. In view of the settlement arrived at between the parties, no useful
purpose will be served in continuance of the present criminal proceedings.
Accordingly, in the interest of justice, the aforesaid FIR and the consequent
proceedings emanating therefrom are hereby quashed.

CRL.M.C. 1174/2020 Page 2 of 3

10. With the above directions, the petition is disposed of.

11. Order dasti to the counsels for the parties.


MARCH 02, 2020/p’ma

CRL.M.C. 1174/2020 Page 3 of 3

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Copyright © 2021 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation