Mohd.Naseem v. State & Anr

ORDER

17.05.2013 By this petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the petitioners seek quashingof FIR No.68/2009registeredunder Section 63 of the Copyright Act, 1957 (Amendment Acts, 1984 & 1994) at P.S. Economic Offences Wing, Crime & Railway, Delhi and all the criminal proceedingsarising Certify that the digital and physical file have been compared and the digital data is as per the physical file and no page is missing. therefrom. The parties are present in person in the Court along with their respective counsel. They are duly identified by the 10 of the present case who is also present in the Court. It is stated by the learned counsel for the parties that with the intervention of common friends and relatives of the respective parties, the petitioners and respondent No.2 have amicably settled all their inter se disputes. The learned counsel for the petitioners submit that as the petitioners and respondent No.2 have amicably settled all their inter se disputes, respondent No.2 is left with no claim or grievance of any nature against the petitioners, therefore, no useftil purpose would be served by continuing the criminal proceedings against the petitioners. The counsel, therefore, prays for quashing of the FIR and all subsequent proceedings arising out from the same. Respondent No.2 (Rajnish Pawari) is the complainant in the said FIR who is also present in the Court with his counsel. He confirms the factum of amicable settlement with the petitioners and filed affidavits in support of quashing of the FIR in both the petitions. He has no objection if the FIR in question is quashed against the petitioners. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties. In view of tlie aforesaid amicable settlement arrived at between the parties, no useful purpose would be served by continuing the criminal proceedings against the petitioners, as the same would only be an exercise in fiitility and wastage of precious time of the Court. Accordingly,the petition is allowed and FIR No.68/2.009registered under Section 63 of the Copyright Act, 1957 (Amendment Acts, 1984 & 1994) at P.S. Economic Offences Wing, Crime & Railway, Delhi and all the proceedings arising therefrom as against the petitioner are quashed. MAY 17,2013 V

KAILASH GAMBHIR, J.

m $-76 & 4. * IN THE HIGH COURT + CRL.M.C. 2054/2013 MOHD.NASEEM Through: + versus STATE & ANR. Through: CRL.M.C. 4290/2012 RAJESH NANDWANI Through: versus STATE & ANR. Through: OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Petitioner Mr.Dushyant Swaroop & Mr.Yogesh Swroop, Advocates Respondents Mr.Navin Sharma, AFP for State with SI Shan Singh, PW EOW Mr.P.K.Mittal, Advocate for R-2 along with R-2 in person Petitioner Mr.Rahul Vidhani, Advocate Respondents Mr.Navin Sharma, APP for State with SI Shan Singh, PW EOW Mr.P.K.Mittal, Advocate for R-2 along with R-2 in person CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH GAMBHIR %