Judgment · High Court

Mr. Sulaiman Mohd. Khan and Mr. Zulfaqar Ali Khan, Advs. for the petitioner. Mr. M.P. Singh, AFP for the State along with SI Manvender Singh, P.S. Sarojini Nagar. Mr. Bharat Sharma, Adv. for respondent nos. 2 8b, 3 along with respondent nos. 2 and 3 are in person. + Crl. M.C. No. 1255/2011 •k FIR in question was registered on the complaint of respondent no.3. Deceased Avdesh Kumar @ Ramesh Yadav used to work in the shop of petitioner as a helper. On 22""^ September, 2005 at about 4:40 pm petitioner asked Ramesh Yadav to change the bulb. While doing so deceased sustained electric shock and died. Respondent no.3, in the FIR, stated that wiring of the shop was defective and this fact was brought to the notice of the petitioner but he did not take any steps to •get the wiring changed. Now, respondent no.2, who is mother of deceased, states that she has compromised the matter with the petitioner amicably, inasmuch as, petitioner has paid her ?2 lakhs in order compensate her. She further states that she has no objection in case the FIR is quashed. Keeping in mind' that petitioner has settled the matter with respondent nos. 2 and 3, in the larger interest, FIR No. 497/2005 under Sections 304A IPG registered at Police Station Sarojini Nagar and consequent proceedings emanating therefrom are quashed. Signature Not Verified Signing Date:28.08.2024 16:54:31 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. Petition is disposed of in the above terms. Dasti. April 25, 2011 AtK. PATHAK, J.