Delhi HC orders accused to help traffic cops for month, quashes molestation case

Justice Navin Chawla, in an order on April 16, directed the man to report to the deputy commissioner of police (traffic) for the duty

The Delhi high court quashed a case against a man accused of violating the modesty of a woman, after the two parties came to an amicable resolution, on the condition that he would aid the Delhi traffic police at a designated traffic signal for a month.

The court was hearing a petition filed by the man, seeking dismissal of the FIR lodged against him under sections 354, 506 and 509 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), pertaining to outraging the modesty of a woman, criminal intimidation and acts intended to insult the modesty of a woman, respectively. (HT Archive)

The court nixed the FIR, deeming further legal proceedings unnecessary, “as they would only escalate tensions between the parties and burden the state financially”.

For seeking quashing of an FIR, an accused can approach the high court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), which empowers the high court to take a decision that prevents the abuse of process of court.

Justice Navin Chawla, in an order on April 16, directed the man to report to the deputy commissioner of police (traffic) for the duty. “At the end of the aforesaid period of 30 days, DCP (traffic) shall issue a certificate to the petitioner, which the petitioner shall thereafter file before this court within a period of two months from today,” justice Chawla said in his order.

The court was hearing a petition filed by the man, seeking dismissal of the FIR lodged against him under sections 354, 506 and 509 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), pertaining to outraging the modesty of a woman, criminal intimidation and acts intended to insult the modesty of a woman, respectively.

In his plea, the man’s counsel advocate Nitesh Mehra emphasised that both parties voluntarily settled their dispute and signed a settlement agreement in March 2022. Additionally, the woman, who attended the proceedings virtually, confirmed that she had resolved the matter willingly and without coercion.

Accepting the plea, the court said in its order: “Keeping in view the fact that the respondent no 2 (complainant) does not wish to pursue her complaint any further, as also the settlement arrived at between the parties, I find that no useful purpose shall be served in continuing with the proceedings of the present FIR.”