Full Text
Translation output
Crl.M.C. 2542/2019 HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Date of Order: May 10, 2019
Date of Order: May 10, 2019
CRL.M.C. 2542/2019 & CRL.M.A. 10145/2019
MUNNA LAL & ORS. .....Petitioners
Through: Mr. Vikas Yadav & Mr. Praveen Goel, Advocates.
MUNNA LAL & ORS. .....Petitioners
Through: Mr. Vikas Yadav & Mr. Praveen Goel, Advocates.
VERSUS
STATE & ORS. .....Respondents
Through: Mr. M.P. Singh, Additional Public Prosecutor for State with SI
Hemant.
Respondent Nos. 2 to 5 in person.
Through: Mr. M.P. Singh, Additional Public Prosecutor for State with SI
Hemant.
Respondent Nos. 2 to 5 in person.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR O R D E R (ORAL)
Quashing of FIR No. 471/2014 under Sections 354/323/308/34 of
IPC, registered at Police Station Vasant Kunj North, Delhi is sought on the basis of affidavits of 29th April, 2019 of respondent Nos. 2 to 5 and on the ground that the misunderstanding which led to registration of the FIR in question, now stands cleared amongst the parties.
Upon notice, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent-
State submits that respondent Nos. 2 to 5 present in the Court, are the complainants/first-informants of FIR in question and they have been identified to be so, by SI Hemant, on the basis of identity proof produced by them.
2019:DHC:2585 Respondent Nos. 2 to 5 present in the Court, affirm the contents of their affidavits of 29th April, 2019 and submit that the misunderstanding, which led to registration of the FIR in question, now stands cleared amongst the parties and now, no grievance against petitioners survives and so, to restore cordiality amongst the parties, who are related to each other, 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.”
In the facts and circumstances of this case, I find that continuance of proceedings arising out of the FIR in question would be an exercise in futility as the misunderstanding, which led to registration of the FIR in question, now stands cleared amongst the parties.
Accordingly, this petition is allowed, subject to costs of ₹10,000/- to be deposited by petitioners with Prime Minister’s National Relief Fund within a week from today. Upon placing on record the proof of deposit of costs within a week thereafter and handing over its copy to the
Investigating Officer, FIR No. 471/2014 under Sections 354/323/308/34 of IPC, registered at Police Station Vasant Kunj North, Delhi and the proceedings emanating therefrom shall stand quashed qua petitioners.
This petition and application are accordingly disposed of.
Dasti.
(SUNIL GAUR)
JUDGE
MAY 10, 2019 p’ma
Quashing of FIR No. 471/2014 under Sections 354/323/308/34 of
IPC, registered at Police Station Vasant Kunj North, Delhi is sought on the basis of affidavits of 29th April, 2019 of respondent Nos. 2 to 5 and on the ground that the misunderstanding which led to registration of the FIR in question, now stands cleared amongst the parties.
Upon notice, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent-
State submits that respondent Nos. 2 to 5 present in the Court, are the complainants/first-informants of FIR in question and they have been identified to be so, by SI Hemant, on the basis of identity proof produced by them.
2019:DHC:2585 Respondent Nos. 2 to 5 present in the Court, affirm the contents of their affidavits of 29th April, 2019 and submit that the misunderstanding, which led to registration of the FIR in question, now stands cleared amongst the parties and now, no grievance against petitioners survives and so, to restore cordiality amongst the parties, who are related to each other, 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.”
In the facts and circumstances of this case, I find that continuance of proceedings arising out of the FIR in question would be an exercise in futility as the misunderstanding, which led to registration of the FIR in question, now stands cleared amongst the parties.
Accordingly, this petition is allowed, subject to costs of ₹10,000/- to be deposited by petitioners with Prime Minister’s National Relief Fund within a week from today. Upon placing on record the proof of deposit of costs within a week thereafter and handing over its copy to the
Investigating Officer, FIR No. 471/2014 under Sections 354/323/308/34 of IPC, registered at Police Station Vasant Kunj North, Delhi and the proceedings emanating therefrom shall stand quashed qua petitioners.
This petition and application are accordingly disposed of.
Dasti.
(SUNIL GAUR)
JUDGE
MAY 10, 2019 p’ma
JUDGMENT