Read Time: 05 minutes

Synopsis

In a recent ruling, the Delhi High Court has imposed an unusual condition of assisting the Traffic Police at a designated traffic signal for a period of 30 days, for quashing an FIR.

The case was registered under Sections 354, 506 and 509 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) which deal with the offences of use of assault or criminal force upon woman with intent to outrage her modesty, punishment for criminal intimidation and use of words, gestures or acts intended to insult the modesty of a woman, respectively.

Justice Navin Chawla, in his judgment, acknowledged the settlement between the parties and the consent of the woman (respondent no.2) to quash the FIR.  She also appeared via video conferencing before the court and affirmed the settlement, asserting it was voluntary and without coercion.

Keeping in view the settlement arrived at between the parties and the wish of the woman to not continue the prosecution against the accused man, the court noted that “no useful purpose shall be served in continuing with the proceedings of the present FIR as it would create further acrimony between the parties and will be an unnecessary burden on the State exchequer.”

The court further emphasised encouraging reconciliation and reducing litigation while relying on by precedents set by the Supreme Court in significant cases like Gian Singh v. State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303, Parbatbhai Aahir @ Parbatbhai Bhimsinbhai Karmur & Ors. v. State of Gujarat & Ors. (2017) 9 SCC 641, and State of Haryana & Ors. v. Bhajan Lal & Ors. 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335.

As a result the court deemed it appropriate to quash the criminal proceedings while exercising its power under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

However, while granting the petition and quashing the FIR along with all subsequent proceedings, the court imposed a unique condition on the petitioner, directing that “the petitioner shall assist the Traffic Police at a traffic signal where he may be deputed by the DCP Traffic, East District, for a period of 30 days.”

Furthermore, the court specified that the petitioner must obtain a certificate from the Deputy Commissioner of Police (Traffic), East District, at the conclusion of the 30-day period, which must be submitted to the court within two months, failure to comply with which would result in further legal proceedings.

 

 

Cause Title: Vikas Bohat v State of NCT of Delhi [CRL.M.C. 6927/2022]