Full Text
Translation output
CRL.M.C. 3480/2019
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Date of Order: July 22, 2019
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Date of Order: July 22, 2019
CRL.M.C. 3480/2019 & Crl.M.A. 31518/2019
PRAVEEN & ORS. ..... Petitioners
Through: Mr. Ajay Kumar & Mr. Sanjay Kumar, Advocates.
PRAVEEN & ORS. ..... Petitioners
Through: Mr. Ajay Kumar & Mr. Sanjay Kumar, Advocates.
VERSUS
STATE (NCT OF DELHI) & ANR. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Rajat Katyal, Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent
No.1-State with ASI Ranvir Singh Respondent No.2 in person.
Through: Mr. Rajat Katyal, Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent
No.1-State with ASI Ranvir Singh Respondent No.2 in person.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR O R D E R (ORAL)
Quashing of FIR No. 97/2015, under Sections 498A/406/34 of IPC, registered at Police Station Nanakpura, Delhi is sought on the basis of mediated settlement of 5th September, 2018 and affidavit of 2nd May, 2019 of second respondent.
Upon notice, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent
No.1-State submits that respondent No.2, present in the Court, is the complainant/first-informant of FIR in question and she has been identified to be so, by ASI Ranvir Singh on the basis of identity proof produced by her.
Respondent No.2, present in the Court, submits that the dispute
2019:DHC:3521 between the parties has been amicably resolved in terms of mediated settlement of 5th September, 2018 and in terms thereof, today she has received amount of ₹85,000/- by way of two fixed deposit in the form of
Kisan Vikas Patra, bearing Nos.4294709892 and 4294746538, dated 11th February, 2019, drawn on Post Office District Court South West, New Delhi from petitioners. Respondent No.2 affirms the contents of her affidavit of 2nd May, 2019 supporting this petition and submits that now no dispute with petitioners survives and so, the proceedings arising out of the FIR in question be brought to an end.
Supreme Court in Parbatbhai Aahir @ Parbatbhai Bhimsinhbhai
Vs. State of Gujarat (2017) 9 SCC 641 has reiterated the parameters for exercising inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of
FIR/criminal proceedings, which are as under:-
“16.7. As distinguished from serious offences, there may be criminal cases which have an overwhelming or predominant element of a civil dispute. They stand on a distinct footing insofar as the exercise of the inherent power to quash is concerned.
16.8. Criminal cases involving offences which arise from commercial, financial, mercantile, partnership or similar transactions with an essentially civil flavour may in appropriate situations fall for quashing where parties have settled the dispute.
16.9. In such a case, the High Court may quash the criminal proceeding if in view of the compromise between the disputants, the possibility of a conviction is remote and the continuation of a criminal proceeding would cause oppression and prejudice.”
Since the subject matter of this FIR is essentially matrimonial, which now stands mutually and amicably settled between parties, therefore, continuance of proceedings arising out of the FIR in question would be an exercise in futility.
Accordingly, FIR No. 97/2015, under Sections 498A/406/34 of
IPC, registered at Police Station Nanakpura, Delhi and the proceedings emanating therefrom are hereby quashed qua petitioners.
This petition and application are accordingly disposed of.
(SUNIL GAUR)
JUDGE
JULY 22, 2019 r
Quashing of FIR No. 97/2015, under Sections 498A/406/34 of IPC, registered at Police Station Nanakpura, Delhi is sought on the basis of mediated settlement of 5th September, 2018 and affidavit of 2nd May, 2019 of second respondent.
Upon notice, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent
No.1-State submits that respondent No.2, present in the Court, is the complainant/first-informant of FIR in question and she has been identified to be so, by ASI Ranvir Singh on the basis of identity proof produced by her.
Respondent No.2, present in the Court, submits that the dispute
2019:DHC:3521 between the parties has been amicably resolved in terms of mediated settlement of 5th September, 2018 and in terms thereof, today she has received amount of ₹85,000/- by way of two fixed deposit in the form of
Kisan Vikas Patra, bearing Nos.4294709892 and 4294746538, dated 11th February, 2019, drawn on Post Office District Court South West, New Delhi from petitioners. Respondent No.2 affirms the contents of her affidavit of 2nd May, 2019 supporting this petition and submits that now no dispute with petitioners survives and so, the proceedings arising out of the FIR in question be brought to an end.
Supreme Court in Parbatbhai Aahir @ Parbatbhai Bhimsinhbhai
Vs. State of Gujarat (2017) 9 SCC 641 has reiterated the parameters for exercising inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of
FIR/criminal proceedings, which are as under:-
“16.7. As distinguished from serious offences, there may be criminal cases which have an overwhelming or predominant element of a civil dispute. They stand on a distinct footing insofar as the exercise of the inherent power to quash is concerned.
16.8. Criminal cases involving offences which arise from commercial, financial, mercantile, partnership or similar transactions with an essentially civil flavour may in appropriate situations fall for quashing where parties have settled the dispute.
16.9. In such a case, the High Court may quash the criminal proceeding if in view of the compromise between the disputants, the possibility of a conviction is remote and the continuation of a criminal proceeding would cause oppression and prejudice.”
Since the subject matter of this FIR is essentially matrimonial, which now stands mutually and amicably settled between parties, therefore, continuance of proceedings arising out of the FIR in question would be an exercise in futility.
Accordingly, FIR No. 97/2015, under Sections 498A/406/34 of
IPC, registered at Police Station Nanakpura, Delhi and the proceedings emanating therefrom are hereby quashed qua petitioners.
This petition and application are accordingly disposed of.
(SUNIL GAUR)
JUDGE
JULY 22, 2019 r
JUDGMENT