The Delhi High Court has quashed an FIR lodged against Vikas Kumar Yogi, a Media Coordinator for the Aam Aadmi Party, arising from an altercation with a female journalist, after the parties reached an amicable settlement. Justice Amit Mahajan found that continuing with the proceedings would serve no useful purpose and would amount to an abuse of the judicial process. However, the Court imposed costs of ₹25,000 on Yogi, directing that the amount be deposited into the Delhi Police Martyrs’ Fund.
The FIR had been registered under various penal provisions, including Sections 323, 341, 506, 509, 427, 149, and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The complainant, employed as a senior reporter with a news channel, alleged that in May of the previous year, she had gone to the AAP office to report on alleged foreign funding received by the party. According to the complaint, Yogi rushed toward her and engaged in an intimidating argument. She claimed that Yogi incited party workers to snatch her camera, and that she and her cameraperson were surrounded, pushed, and forced toward the gates of the premises. The party workers were alleged to have raised derogatory slogans and used force.
Subsequently, a caretaker associated with the party filed a counter-FIR against the journalist, but that was later withdrawn in view of the settlement between the parties. Yogi then filed a petition for quashing the original FIR, asserting that the settlement had been reached voluntarily, without coercion or undue influence. In his plea, he also tendered an unconditional apology for his conduct and undertook not to engage in similar behavior in the future.
The complainant gave a statement before the High Court that she no longer had any grievance against Yogi, that she was satisfied with his apology, and that she did not wish to pursue any further proceedings stemming from the FIR. She also expressed no objection to the quashing of the FIR in its entirety.
Relying on the settled principle that quashing is permissible if continuation of proceedings would serve no purpose and would amount to abuse of process, the Court allowed Yogi’s petition. While noting the seriousness of the allegations, the Court gave weight to the settlement between the parties and the absence of ongoing grievance by the complainant. The Court held that maintaining the FIR in these circumstances would achieve little beyond mobilizing state machinery and prolonging dispute.
Accordingly, the Court quashed FIR No. 168/2024 and all associated legal proceedings to the extent they related to Yogi, subject to the condition that he pay the cost. The ₹25,000 cost must be deposited within eight weeks from the date of the order.
0 Comments
Thank you for your response. It will help us to improve in the future.