IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
CRL. MISC. (MAIN) PETITION No.Petition number OF Year of filing of the petition.
IN THE MATTER OF :-
Petitioner's name: PETITIONER
VERSUS
Respondents' names: RESPONDENTS
FIR No. FIR number
U/s.: 323/307/34 OF IPC,
P.S.: Police station
INDEX
| 5. | CRIMINAL MISC. MAIN PETITION UNDER SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C. FOR QUASHING OF FIR, ALONG WITH AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT | |
| 6. | ANNEXURE P-1: TRUE COPY OF FIR BEARING NO. FIR number, P.S.: Police station | |
| 7. | ANNEXURE P-2: TRUE COPY OF CHARGE SHEET IN FIR BEARING NO. FIR number, P.S. Police station, DELHI | |
| 8. | ANNEXURE P-3: AFFIDAVIT OF RESPONDENT NOS. 2 & 3 / COMPLAINANTS | |
| 9. | ANNEXURE P-4 (COLLY): COPY OF THE EXAMINATION-IN-CHIEF DATED Date of examination-in-chief of PW-1 AND Date of examination-in-chief of PW-2 OF PW-1 AND PW-2 / RESPONDENT NOS. 2 AND 3 | |
| 10. | ANNEXURE P-5 (COLLY): COPY OF ID PROOF AND PHOTOGRAPH OF THE PETITIONER AND RESPONDENT NO. 2 | |
| 11. | APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C. FOR EXEMPTION FROM FILING CERTIFIED COPIES, WITH AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT | |
| 12. | VAKALATNAMAS OF THE PETITIONER AND RESPONDENT NOS. 2 & 3 | |
PETITIONER
Through
Place: New Delhi
Dated:
Counsel's name
COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER
Counsel's chamber/address line 1
Counsel's address line 2
Counsel's address line 3
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
CRL. MISC. (MAIN) PETITION No.Petition number OF Year of filing of the petition.
IN THE MATTER OF :-
Petitioner's name: PETITIONER
VERSUS
Respondents' names: RESPONDENTS
FIR No. FIR number
U/s.: 323/307/34 OF IPC,
P.S.: Police station
URGENT APPLICATION
To
The Hon'ble Joint Registrar,
Hon'ble High Court of Delhi,
New Delhi.
Sir,
It is respectfully requested that the accompanying petition / application may kindly be treated as urgent, in accordance with the provisions of the Delhi High Court Rules, regulations and orders.
The grounds of urgency are as set out in the accompanying petition / application. It is accordingly prayed that the accompanying petition for quashing of the proceedings in FIR No. FIR number, P.S.: Police station, Delhi, under Section 323/307/34 of the IPC, may kindly be treated as urgent.
PETITIONER
Through
Place: New Delhi
Dated:
Counsel's name
COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER
Counsel's address line 1
Counsel's address line 2
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
CRL. MISC. (MAIN) PETITION No.Petition number OF Year of filing of the petition.
IN THE MATTER OF :-
Petitioner's name: PETITIONER
VERSUS
Respondents' names: RESPONDENTS
FIR No. FIR number
U/s.: 323/307/34 OF IPC,
P.S.: Police station
MEMO OF PARTIES
MR. Petitioner's name
S/o Sh. Petitioner's father's name
R/o Petitioner's address
Delhi-Petitioner's postal code: PETITIONER
VERSUS
1. THE STATE (NCT OF DELHI)
2. MR. Respondent no.2's name
S/o Sh. Respondent no.2's father's name
R/o Respondent no.2's address
Delhi-Respondent no.2's postal code.
3. MR. Respondent no.3's name
S/o Sh. Respondent no.3's father's name
R/o Respondent no.3's address
Delhi-Respondent no.3's postal code: RESPONDENTS
FILED BY
Place: New Delhi
Dated:
Counsel's name
COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER
Counsel's address line 1
Counsel's address line 2
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
CRL. MISC. (MAIN) PETITION No.Petition number OF Year of filing of the petition.
IN THE MATTER OF :-
MR. Petitioner's name
S/o Sh. Petitioner's father's name
R/o Petitioner's address
Petitioner's address line 2
Delhi-Petitioner's postal code: PETITIONER
VERSUS
1. THE STATE (NCT OF DELHI)
2. MR. Respondent no.2's name
S/o Sh. Respondent no.2's father's name
R/o Respondent no.2's address
Respondent no.2's address line 2
Delhi-Respondent no.2's postal code.
3. MR. Respondent no.3's name
S/o Sh. Respondent no.3's father's name
R/o Respondent no.3's address
Delhi-Respondent no.3's postal code: RESPONDENTS
FIR No. FIR number
U/s.: 323/307/34 OF IPC,
P.S.: Police station
CRIMINAL MISC. MAIN PETITION ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONER UNDER SECTION 482 OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE FOR QUASHING OF FIR BEARING No. FIR number REGISTERED AT POLICE STATION Police station, DELHI, UNDER SECTION 323/307/34 OF THE INDIAN PENAL CODE, THE CHARGE SHEET FILED THEREIN BEFORE THE LEARNED TRIAL COURT, DISTRICT District of trial court, Trial court complex name line 1 Trial court complex name line 2 COURTS, DELHI IN S.C. NO. Sessions case number, AND THE PROCEEDINGS EMANATING THEREFROM.
MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH :-
1.That the Petitioner is a law-abiding citizen of India and has full faith in the administration of justice. That the Petitioner has invoked the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Hon'ble Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for the quashing of FIR No. FIR number, Police Station Police station, Delhi, registered under Section 323/307/34 of the Indian Penal Code on the basis of the complaint lodged by Respondent No. 2 against the Petitioner. A copy of FIR bearing No. FIR number is annexed to this petition as Annexure P-1.
2.That the Petitioner is aggrieved by the FIR lodged by Respondent No. 2 at Police Station Police station, Delhi. By this petition, the Petitioner is, inter alia, seeking the quashing of the said FIR No. FIR number ("FIR"), the charge sheet filed thereunder before the Ld. Trial Court of Sh. Trial court judge's name, Special Judge, Special judge designation, District of trial court District, Trial court complex name Courts, Delhi, in C.S. No. Complaint case number, titled "Complainant's name in case title Vs. Accused's name in case title", and the proceedings emanating therefrom.
3.That the present petition has been filed by the Petitioner, and the brief facts of the case necessary for the disposal of the present petition are summed up as under:-
3.1It is the case of the prosecution that on Date of the alleged incident at about Time of the alleged incident, the Complainant (Respondent No. 2 herein), along with his friend, Complainant's friend's name, was having food while sitting at a shop in Gali No. Gali number of incident spot. One girl and two boys were sitting at the table next to the Complainant. While the Complainant and his friend were talking and laughing, the boy sitting at the adjacent table, later identified as Petitioner's name (the Petitioner herein / accused before the Ld. Trial Court), came up to the Complainant and started abusing him. Upon objection being taken to the abuse, the Petitioner and his friend, whose name was later learnt to be Co-accused's name (a minor at the time, whose trial was conducted before the Juvenile Justice Board), started fighting with the Complainant and his friend. In the meantime, as alleged, the Petitioner struck the head of the Complainant with a piece of brick lying in the street, as a result of which the Complainant sustained an injury on his head; whereupon their other companion also arrived, and the three of them allegedly began fighting with the Complainant and his friend.
3.2It is further alleged that the Complainant's friend, Respondent no.3's name (Respondent No. 3 herein), who was passing by, came forward to intervene, whereupon the three persons also started fighting with him; that the Petitioner and his friend, Co-accused's name, allegedly took out an object with a sharp edge and struck Respondent No. 3, as a result of which Respondent No. 3 sustained injuries on his stomach and back. Thereafter, the three of them fled from the spot. The Complainant and Respondent No. 3 proceeded to Hospital where treatment was taken for treatment; in the meantime, someone informed the police, and a PCR van arrived at the spot. Since Respondent No. 3 had sustained serious injuries, the Complainant seated him in the PCR van, and the two of them first went home to inform the family, after which the Complainant and Respondent No. 3 received treatment at the trauma centre. As alleged, the Petitioner and Co-accused's name, along with their other companion, fought with the Complainant and Respondent No. 3 and caused them grievous hurt.
3.3That during the course of investigation, the petitioner was granted bail subject to conditions. Since then, the investigation has been completed and the charge sheet has been filed by the Investigating Officer under Sections 323/307/34 of the IPC, and charge has accordingly been framed, to which the petitioner pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
Copy of the charge sheet filed by the Investigating Officer against the petitioner is annexed hereto as Annexure P-2.
4.That in the trial, during the examination-in-chief of Respondents No. 2 and 3, examined as PW1 and PW2 on Date of examination-in-chief of PW2 and Date of examination-in-chief of PW1 respectively, both witnesses specifically stated that no injuries were caused by the petitioner to Respondents No. 2 and 3, and that only an altercation took place. Copies of the examination-in-chief dated Date of examination-in-chief of PW2 and Date of examination-in-chief of PW1 of PW1 and PW2 are annexed to this petition as Annexure P-4 (colly).
5.That the impugned FIR was lodged by the complainants / Respondents No. 2 and 3 in the heat of the moment upon the said altercation. In view of the same, the complainants submitted that the allegations were no longer to be pursued, as the petitioner has also tendered his apology to the complainants / Respondents No. 2 and 3.
6.Aggrieved by the FIR registered against the petitioner, the petitioner is moving this petition seeking quashing of the FIR, amongst other grounds, on the following grounds:-
- : G R O U N D S : -
A.That it is a settled principle of law that, even otherwise, there is no allegation against the petitioner and no material evidence has been placed on record against the petitioner which would constitute an offence, and therefore the said FIR is liable to be quashed on this ground alone.
B.That the present complaint does not disclose any offence alleged to have been committed by the petitioner, inasmuch as the complainants submitted that the allegations were no longer to be pursued, and the complainants had rather represented the matter to be a case of misunderstanding.
C.That nothing remains in the present FIR, as the complainants do not wish to pursue the matter further, the petitioner having tendered his apology to the complainants, and an amicable mutual settlement having been arrived at between the petitioner and the complainants / Respondents No. 2 and 3, since the present FIR was lodged only in the heat of the moment upon an altercation, and no wrong was done by the petitioner to Respondents No. 2 and 3.
D.That the investigation in the present FIR has been completed and the charge sheet has already been filed by the Investigating Officer before the Ld. Trial Court; during the investigation, the petitioner fully cooperated, and nothing incriminating was found against him.
E.That, in the trial, during the examination-in-chief of the complainants / Respondents No. 2 and 3, examined as PW1 and PW2 on Date of examination-in-chief of PW2 and Date of examination-in-chief of PW1 respectively, both witnesses specifically stated as follows:-
“Date of examination-in-chief of PW2 PW2
The accused started an altercation with me. During the course of the altercation, we both came out of the shop. There was a huge crowd outside the shop, and while we were arguing with each other, a stone hit me on the head, thrown by someone, due to which I sustained an injury. I do not know as to who hit the stone on my head. Witness statement line 1
Witness statement line 2
Witness statement line 3
On the next date, i.e. 19.01.2018, the police recorded my statement in this regard.
I have read the statement marked PW2/A and it bears my signatures at point A. I put my said signatures without going through the contents of the statement. I did not state such facts to the police as are mentioned in the statement marked PW2/A. I did not state before the police that the accused Petitioner's name had hit a piece of brick on my head, or that Co-accused's name had caused injury on the person of the victim. I did not mention the name of the assailant before the police. I did not show the place of occurrence to the police.
Accused Petitioner's name is present in court (the witness has correctly identified accused Petitioner's name). Accused Petitioner's name did not cause any injury on me; only an altercation took place between me and Petitioner's name.
Witness statement line 4..
Witness statement line 7 by Sh. Cross-examining counsel's name, Ld. Counsel for the accused.
I did not know the accused prior to the occurrence. I came to know the name of the accused on the day of the occurrence. Petitioner's name did not cause any injury upon the person of Injured person's name. Vol. Some unknown person caused the said injury upon Injured person's name.
RO&AC”
“Date of examination-in-chief of PW1 PW1
Witness statement line 5. It is incorrect that the police did not record the true version of what I had told them. (Vol. What I had stated in my examination-in-chief is the true version of the incident. At that time, Petitioner's name and his associates started arguing, and thereafter Co-accused's name had left the spot, and I was got engaged in heated arguments by Co-accused's name, and during the course of the said arguments, I was hit on my stomach on the back side with a knife by Co-accused's name).
Witness statement line 6..”
In view of the above-stated statements of the complainants / Respondents No. 2 and 3, it is clear that nothing wrong was done by the petitioner to the complainants except an altercation, and the injuries were caused by the other accused person and not by the petitioner. As such, no case is made out against the petitioner, who is innocent. Hence, the present FIR is liable to be quashed.
F.That the present FIR, being ex facie mala fide, falls squarely within the scope of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal, reported in AIR 1992 SC 604 (para 107), and the petitioner is entitled to have the proceedings quashed on that ground as well.
G.Because, in the present case, even if the allegations made by the complainants are taken to be true, no offence under Sections 323/307/34 IPC is made out; in any event, there is no such allegation in the complaint. It is pertinent to mention that even if the contentions of the complainants are believed to be true, the present case does not fall within that ambit.
H.Because it has been held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of “K.R. Purushothaman Vs. State of Kerala”, 2005 (12) SCC 631, that each one of the circumstances must be proved beyond reasonable doubt, and the circumstances so proved must form a chain of events from which the only irresistible conclusion that can safely be drawn is as to the guilt of the accused, no other hypothesis of guilt being possible. We respectfully agree with the law laid down in Navjot Sandhu's case and K.R. Purushothaman's case.
I.Because it has been held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of “Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab”, in para 57, that the position which emerges from the above discussion can be summarised thus: the power of the High Court in quashing a criminal proceeding or FIR or complaint in exercise of its inherent jurisdiction is distinct and different from the power given to a criminal court for compounding the offences under Section 320 of the Code. The inherent power is of wide plenitude with no statutory limitation, but it has to be exercised in accord with the guidelines engrafted in such power, viz., (i) to secure the ends of justice, or (ii) to prevent abuse of the process of any Court. In what cases the power to quash the criminal proceeding or complaint or F.I.R. may be exercised, where the offender and victim have settled their dispute, would depend upon the facts and circumstances of each case, and no category can be prescribed. However, before exercise of such power, the High Court must have due regard to the nature and gravity of the crime. Heinous and serious offences of mental depravity or offences like murder, rape, dacoity, etc., cannot be fittingly quashed even though the victim or the victim's family and the offender have settled the dispute. Such offences are not private in nature and have a serious impact upon society. Similarly, any compromise between the victim and the offender in relation to the offences under special statutes, like the Prevention of Corruption Act, or the offences committed by public servants while working in that capacity, etc., cannot provide any basis for quashing the criminal proceedings involving such offences. But criminal cases having an overwhelmingly and pre-dominatingly civil flavour stand on a different footing for the purposes of quashing, particularly the offences arising from commercial, financial, mercantile, civil, partnership or such like transactions, or the offences arising out of matrimony relating to dowry, etc., or the family disputes where the wrong is basically private or personal in nature and the parties have resolved their entire dispute. In this category of cases, the High Court may quash the criminal proceedings if, in its view, because of the compromise between the offender and the victim, the possibility of conviction is remote and bleak, and the continuation of the criminal case would put the accused to great oppression and prejudice, and extreme injustice would be caused to him by not quashing the criminal case despite full and complete settlement and compromise with the victim. In other words, the High Court must consider whether it would be unfair or contrary to the interest of justice to continue with the criminal proceeding, or whether the continuation of the criminal proceeding would tantamount to an abuse of the process of law despite the settlement and compromise between the victim and the wrongdoer, and whether, to secure the ends of justice, it is appropriate that the criminal case is put to an end; and if the answer to the above question(s) is in the affirmative, the High Court shall be well within its jurisdiction to quash the criminal proceeding.
J
In R. Kalyani vs. Janak C. Mehta & Ors., 2009 (1) SCC 516, it was held in paragraphs 15 and 16 as under:
"15. The propositions of law which emerge from the said decisions are:
(1)The High Court ordinarily would not exercise its inherent jurisdiction to quash a criminal proceeding, and in particular a first information report, unless the allegations contained therein, even if given their face value and taken to be correct in their entirety, disclose no cognizable offence.
(2)For the said purpose, the Court, save and except in very exceptional circumstances, would not look to any document relied upon by the defence.
(3)Such a power should be exercised very sparingly. If the allegations made in the FIR disclose commission of an offence, the Court shall not go beyond the same and pass an order in favour of the accused by holding the absence of any mens rea or actus reus.
(4)If the allegation discloses a civil dispute, the same, by itself, may not be a ground to hold that the criminal proceedings should not be allowed to continue."
It is furthermore well settled that no hard and fast rule can be laid down, and each case has to be considered on its own merits. While exercising its inherent jurisdiction, the Court would not interfere with a genuine complaint, keeping in view the purport and object for which Sections 482 and 483 of the Code of Criminal Procedure were introduced by Parliament; however, it would not hesitate to exercise its jurisdiction in appropriate cases. One of the paramount duties of the superior courts is to ensure that a person who is apparently innocent is not subjected to persecution and humiliation on the basis of a false and wholly untenable complaint.
K
With respect to the power and jurisdiction of this Court to entertain the present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the Hon'ble Apex Court in its recent decision in Prashant Bharti v. State of NCT of Delhi, 2013 (2) AD (S.C.) 89, decided on 23.01.2013, in a similar and identical case, inter alia observed as under:
"19. The proposition of law pertaining to the quashing of criminal proceedings initiated against an accused, by a High Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as "the Cr.P.C."), has been dealt with by this Court in Rajiv Thapar & Ors. vs. Madan Lal Kapoor (Criminal Appeal No. Criminal appeal number of 2013, arising out of SLP (Crl.) No. 4883 of 2008, decided on 23.1.2013), wherein this Court inter alia held as under:
22.The issue being examined in the instant case is the jurisdiction of the High Court under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C., if it chooses to quash the initiation of the prosecution against an accused at the stage of issuing process, or at the stage of committal, or even at the stage of framing of charges. These are all stages before the commencement of the actual trial, and the same parameters would naturally be available for later stages as well. The power vested in the High Court under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C., at the stages referred to hereinabove, would have far-reaching consequences, inasmuch as it would negate the prosecution's/complainant's case without allowing the prosecution/complainant to lead evidence. Such a determination must always be rendered with caution, care and circumspection. To invoke its inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C., the High Court has to be fully satisfied that the material produced by the accused is such as would lead to the conclusion that his/their defence is based on sound, reasonable and indubitable facts; that the material produced is such as would rule out and displace the assertions contained in the charges levelled against the accused; and that the material produced is such as would clearly reject and overrule the veracity of the allegations contained in the accusations levelled by the prosecution/complainant. It should be sufficient to rule out, reject and discard the accusations levelled by the prosecution/complainant without the necessity of recording any evidence. For this purpose, the material relied upon by the defence should not have been refuted, or alternatively, cannot be justifiably refuted, being material of sterling and impeccable quality. The material relied upon by the accused should be such as would persuade a reasonable person to dismiss and condemn the actual basis of the accusations as false. In such a situation, the judicial conscience of the High Court would persuade it to exercise its power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. to quash such criminal proceedings, for that would prevent abuse of the process of the court and secure the ends of justice."
L
On the strength of the above judgments, and the statements of the Complainant/Respondent No. 2, the present FIR is liable to be quashed.
7.That the petitioner craves leave of this Hon'ble Court to raise such other and further grounds as may be available to them at the time of hearing of the present petition.
8.That the petitioner craves leave to alter or amend the petition with the permission of this Hon'ble Court, and by way of the present petition, the petitioner humbly seeks the indulgence of this Hon'ble Court to pass appropriate orders for quashing of the FIR.
9.It is submitted that this Hon'ble High Court has the requisite territorial jurisdiction to try and entertain the present petition, as the FIR has been registered within the territorial limits of this Hon'ble Court. Moreover, the impugned FIR has been registered from within the territorial limits of this Hon'ble Court's jurisdiction.
CERTIFICATE OF NON-FILING
10.The petitioner has not filed any other petition, or any similar petition, either before this Hon'ble Court, or before the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi at New Delhi, or before the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India, except the one detailed hereinabove.
PRAYER
In the facts and circumstances of the case, it is most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to:
A.Quash the FIR bearing No. FIR number under Sections 323/307/34 of the Indian Penal Code, registered with Police Station Police station, Delhi, and the charge-sheet filed before the Ld. Trial Court of Sh. Trial court judge's name, Special Judge, Special judge designation, Central District, Trial court complex name Hazari Courts, Delhi, in C.S. No. Complaint case number, titled "State vs. Accused's name in case title", together with all proceedings emanating therefrom.
B.Pass such other and further orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice.
It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed accordingly.
PETITIONER
Place: New DelhiTHROUGH
Dated:
Counsel's name
COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER
Counsel's address line 1
Counsel's address line 2
Counsel's address line 3
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
CRL. M.C. NO. Application (CRL. M.C.) number OF 2023.
IN
CRL. MISC. (MAIN) PETITION NO. Petition number OF 2023.
IN THE MATTER OF:-
Petitioner's name: PETITIONER
VERSUS
Respondents' names: RESPONDENTS
FIR No. FIR number
U/s.: 323/307/34 OF IPC,
P.S.: Police station
APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 482 OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE FOR EXEMPTION FROM FILING CERTIFIED COPIES OF THE Documents for which certified copies are exempted.
MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:-
1.That the petitioner has filed annexures along with the main petition in support of the petition, and the annexures so filed are true, correct and compared copies of the originals.
2.That the petitioner shall apply for obtaining certified copies of the annexures and undertakes to file the same as soon as they are made available by the concerned copying agency.
It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly exempt the petitioner from filing the certified copies of the annexures.
Such other and further orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may also be passed in the interest of justice.
PETITIONER
Through
Place of filingDated: Date of filing
Counsel's name
COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER
Counsel's address line 1
Counsel's address line 2
Counsel's address line 3
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
CRL. MISC. (MAIN) PETITION No.Petition number OF Year of petition.
IN THE MATTER OF :-
Petitioner's name: PETITIONER
VERSUS
Respondents' names: RESPONDENTS
AFFIDAVIT
Affidavit of Mr. Deponent's name, aged about Deponent's age years, S/o Sh. Deponent's father's name, R/o Deponent's address, who hereby solemnly affirm and declare as under:-
1.That I, the deponent, am the Petitioner in the above-captioned case and am well conversant with the facts and circumstances of the present petition, and am therefore competent to swear this affidavit.
2.That the accompanying petition has been drafted by my counsel under my instructions and the factual contents thereof are true and correct to the best of my knowledge.
3.That the contents of the Synopsis, List of Dates and Paragraphs No. 1 to Number of last factual paragraph of petition, including the sub-paragraphs thereof, of the accompanying petition are true and correct to my knowledge, and the contents of the Grounds, Paragraphs No. Number of first ground paragraph of petition to Number of last ground paragraph of petition of the accompanying petition are based on legal advice received and believed to be true. The last paragraph is the prayer before this Hon'ble Court.
4.That the annexures annexed to the accompanying petition are true copies of their respective originals.
DEPONENT
VERIFICATION :-
Verified at Place of verification on this Date of verification day of Month of verification, Year of verification that the contents of this affidavit are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief and nothing material has been concealed therefrom.
DEPONENT
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
CRL. M.C. NO. Application (CRL. M.C.) number OF Year of petition.
IN
CRL. MISC. (MAIN) PETITION No.Petition number OF Year of petition.
IN THE MATTER OF :-
Petitioner's name: PETITIONER
VERSUS
Respondents' names: RESPONDENTS
AFFIDAVIT
Affidavit of Mr. Deponent's name, aged about Deponent's age years, S/o Deponent's father's name, R/o Deponent's address, who hereby solemnly affirm and declare as under:-
1.That I am the Petitioner in the above-mentioned case and as such I am conversant with the facts and circumstances of the case, and am therefore competent to swear this affidavit.
2.That upon my instructions, my advocate is filing this Application for Exemption from Filing Certified Copies in the above-mentioned case, and I am fully conversant with the facts thereof. I state that the facts stated therein are true and correct to my knowledge. Any annexures filed along with the application are true copies of their respective originals.
DEPONENT
VERIFICATION :-
Verified at Place of verification on this Date of verification day of Month of verification, Year of verification that the contents of this affidavit are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief and nothing material has been concealed therefrom.
DEPONENT
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
CRL. MISC. (MAIN) PETITION No.Petition number OF Year of petition.
IN THE MATTER OF :-
Petitioner's name: PETITIONER
VERSUS
Respondents' names: RESPONDENTS
AFFIDAVIT
Affidavit of Mr. Deponent's name, aged about Deponent's age years, S/o Deponent's father's name, R/o Deponent's address, who hereby state on solemn affirmation and declare as under:-
1.That I am the complainant / Respondent No.2 in the above-mentioned case and as such I am conversant with the facts and circumstances of the case, and am therefore competent to swear this affidavit.
2.That I have gone through the averments made in the accompanying petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., which are true and correct to the best of the deponent's knowledge, and the same have been explained to me in vernacular.
3.That I confirm that the present FIR in question, bearing No.FIR number under Section 323/307/34 IPC registered at P.S. Police station, Delhi, was registered on account of a misunderstanding in the heat of the moment. I further confirm that the matter has been settled / compromised amicably and the petitioner has tendered an apology to me for his mistake. I do not wish to pursue the said FIR.
DEPONENT
VERIFICATION :-
Verified at Place of verification on this Date of verification day of Month of verification, Year of verification that the facts stated in the above affidavit are true to my knowledge, no part thereof is false and nothing material has been concealed therefrom.
DEPONENT
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
CRL. MISC. (MAIN) PETITION No.Petition number OF Year of petition.
IN THE MATTER OF :-
Petitioner's name: PETITIONER
VERSUS
Respondents' names: RESPONDENTS
AFFIDAVIT
Affidavit of Mr. Deponent's name, aged about Deponent's age years, S/o Sh. Deponent's father's name, R/o Deponent's address, who hereby state on solemn affirmation and declare as under:-
1.That I am the complainant / Respondent No.3 in the above-mentioned case and as such I am conversant with the facts and circumstances of the case, and am therefore competent to swear this affidavit.
2.That I have gone through the averments made in the accompanying petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., which are true and correct to the best of the deponent's knowledge, and the same have been explained to me in vernacular.
3.That I confirm that the present FIR in question, bearing No.FIR number under Section 323/307/34 IPC registered at P.S. Police station, Delhi, was registered on account of a misunderstanding in the heat of the moment. I further confirm that the matter has been settled / compromised amicably and the petitioner has tendered an apology to me for his mistake. I do not wish to pursue the said FIR.
DEPONENT
VERIFICATION :-
Verified at Place of verification on this Date of verification day of Month of verification, Year of verification that the facts stated in the above affidavit are true to my knowledge, no part thereof is false and nothing material has been concealed therefrom.
DEPONENT