Delhi High Court

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS 2042/2025 on 24 December 2015

$~65

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA

O R D E R16.04.2025

%

CRL.M.A. 9194/2025 (Exemption)

1. Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

2. The Application stands disposed of.

CRL.M.C. 2042/2025 & CRL.M.A.9193/2025

1. Criminal Miscellaneous Petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C read with Section 528 BNSS has been filed for quashing of FIR No.0924/2015 dated 24.12.2015 under Section 186/353/333 IPC and 132 of Motor Vehicle Act, P.S.Pandav Nagar.

2. It is submitted that Petitioner was only 19 years of age at the time of incident and was not mature enough to know the consequences of his act. The Petitioner has demonstrated remorse and rehabilitation. He has tendered an apology to Respondent No.2, the constable which has been accepted by him. Respondent No.2 has also submitted a representation to the office of DCP, Outer North dated 10.02.2025 in this regard. It is further submitted that in case the proceedings are not quashed it would cause undue hardship to the Petitioner and jeopardize his education and future career prospects. He intends to travel to Australia for further studies. He has a bright career ahead. He has clean antecedents and has never been involved in any other criminal case. He is willing to compensate the injured and to abide by any terms that may be imposed by the Court.

3. The Petitioner who is present in person submits that he is willing to pay Rs.50,000/- as compensation for the injuries suffered by Respondent No.2.

Page 1 of 2

4. The learned Prosecutor has strongly opposed the present Petition on the ground that it is an offence against the police official which should not be taken lightly. The Respondent No.2 is present in person who has submitted that apology had been tendered to him which he has accepted in his personal capacity.

5. Submissions heard and record perused.

6. It was an incident of 2015 wherein on being asked by the police official, Respondent No.2 to stop the vehicle, he had overshot and tried to escape causing injury to Respondent No.2. The Petitioner was a young boy of about 18 years in 2015 and since then he has not been involved in any offence. He is repenting of his deeds.

7. Considering his young age and the future career, the present FIR and the proceedings emanating therefrom is hereby quashed.

Compensation as offered be given to Respondent No.2 within seven days. In addition, Rs.50,000/- be deposited in Delhi High Court Advocates’ Welfare Trust.

8. Petition is disposed of.

APRIL 16, 2025rk

NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA, J

Page 2 of 2

Loading citations and judicial treatment…

You have used today's free searches. Sign in, for free, to keep searching without a limit.

Compass reads the judgments for you and finds the paragraphs for and against your question. Sign in to use it.

My Vault follows judgments for you and records every later decision that cites them. Sign in to keep one.

Sign in to download the court's PDF. The full text stays free to read here.

Search and read Indian judgments without limits, save them to My Vault and find the relevant paragraphs with Compass.

Open the sign-in page instead