Delhi Court Orders Social Service After Neighbours Fight Over Car Scratch

Delhi High Court expressed its dismay after a man was beaten up with a cricket bat by the parents of a boy who was slapped by him for scratching his car.

The court agreed to quash a First Information Report (FIR) registered in the 2017 incident and ordered both the sides to do social service.

The complainant had initially slapped a 13-year-old boy for scratching his car. In turn, his parents came out with a cricket bat and a wicket to hit the man, who suffered simple head injuries.

"This is not an acceptable state of affairs," Justice Jasmeet Singh said in an order dated November 2, adding that both the parties must do some social good.

The court said it was a case that showed "total lack of tolerance and sensitivity for neighbours by both the parties".

Justice Singh said that since the two sides had settled their disputes, no useful purpose would be served in continuing with the FIR, which was lodged in 2017.

The court also pointed out that a charge sheet has already been filed and a considerable amount of the police and the judiciary was wasted.

Even though the parties have settled the matter, the conduct of both the petitioners and the respondent was not acceptable, the court added, directing the complainant to pay Rs 10,000 to Delhi High Court Legal Service Committee.

The court ordered the teenager's guardian, who owns a shop, to distribute a stationery kit each among 100 needy students of a school run by the Municipal Corporation of Delhi.

The kit must constitute a set of one notebook of approximately 200 pages, two pens, a pencil and an eraser, the court said, asking the investigating officer to identify the school so that the material can be given to the headmaster and the process completed within four weeks.

The high court quashed the FIR registered against the boy's parents in July 2017 at Burari Police Station.

Both the parties submitted that they had arrived at a settlement out of their own free will and without any undue influence, threat or pressure and that the complainant had no objection if the FIR was quashed.

(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)