Full Text
Translation output
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Date ofOrder:March 29,2019
Date ofOrder:March 29,2019
CRL.M.C.1677/2019
RAM BRJJ SAGAR& ANR Petitioners
Through: Mr.Manish Kr.Pratihast& Mr. Rajesh Sharma,Advocates
RAM BRJJ SAGAR& ANR Petitioners
Through: Mr.Manish Kr.Pratihast& Mr. Rajesh Sharma,Advocates
VERSUS
THE STATE&ANR Respondents
Through: Mr.M.S.Oberoi,Additional Public Prosecutor for State with SI
RajuYadav Mr.Shourya Garg,Advocate for Respondent No.2
Through: Mr.M.S.Oberoi,Additional Public Prosecutor for State with SI
RajuYadav Mr.Shourya Garg,Advocate for Respondent No.2
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR
(ORAL)
Quashing of FIR No. 1598/2004, under Sections 102/103/104 of
Trade Mark Act, 1999 and Section 6.3 ofCopyright Act, 1957 registered at police station Sultan Purl, Delhi is sought on the basis of settlement agreement of 20^ October^ 2018 (■Annexure-B) reached between the parties.
Mr. Shourya Garg, Advocate appears on behalf of respondent NO. 2 and submits that he has instructions to state that settlement agreement of20"^ October, 2018 (Annexiire-B) has been Eilly acted upon and there is no objection to quash the FIR in question 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 SCO 641 has reiterated the parameters for exercising inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of
FIR / criminal complaint, which are as under:-
Crl.MC. 1677/2019 ~ Page 1 of2 2019:DHC:7536 "16.7.As distinguished from serious offences, there may be criminal cases which have an overwhelming or predominant element ofa civil dispute. They stand on a distinctfooting insofar as the exercise ofthe inherentpower to quash is concerned.
16.8. Criminal cases involving offences which arise from commercial, financial, mercantile, partnership or similar transactions with an essentially civilflavour may m appropriate situationsfallfor quashing whereparties havesettled the dispute.
16.9.In such a case, the High Court may quash the criminal proceeding ifin view ofthe compromise between the disputants, the possibility ofa conviction is remote and the continuation ofa criminalproceeding wouldcause oppression andprejudice;".
Since the dispute between,the parties has been amicably resolved, therefore, continuance of proceedings arising out ofthe FIR in question would be an exercise in futility.
Accordingly, this petition is allowed subject to costs of?10,000/- to be deposited by petitioners with Prime Minister's NationalReliefFund within a week from today. Upon placing on record the proofofdepqsit of costs within a week thereafter and handing over its copy to the
Investigating Officer,FIR No. 1598/2004,under Sections 102/103/104 of
Trade Mark Act, 1999 and Section 63 of Copyright Act, 1957 registered at police station Sultan Purl, Delhi and the proceedings emanating therefrom shall stand quashed qua petitioners.
This petition is accordingly disposed of.
Dasti.
(SUNIL GAUR)
JUDGE
MARCH 29,2019 p'ma iKaigiSJiinii Crl.M.C. 1677/2019 Page2of2
2019:DHC:7536
(ORAL)
Quashing of FIR No. 1598/2004, under Sections 102/103/104 of
Trade Mark Act, 1999 and Section 6.3 ofCopyright Act, 1957 registered at police station Sultan Purl, Delhi is sought on the basis of settlement agreement of 20^ October^ 2018 (■Annexure-B) reached between the parties.
Mr. Shourya Garg, Advocate appears on behalf of respondent NO. 2 and submits that he has instructions to state that settlement agreement of20"^ October, 2018 (Annexiire-B) has been Eilly acted upon and there is no objection to quash the FIR in question 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 SCO 641 has reiterated the parameters for exercising inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of
FIR / criminal complaint, which are as under:-
Crl.MC. 1677/2019 ~ Page 1 of2 2019:DHC:7536 "16.7.As distinguished from serious offences, there may be criminal cases which have an overwhelming or predominant element ofa civil dispute. They stand on a distinctfooting insofar as the exercise ofthe inherentpower to quash is concerned.
16.8. Criminal cases involving offences which arise from commercial, financial, mercantile, partnership or similar transactions with an essentially civilflavour may m appropriate situationsfallfor quashing whereparties havesettled the dispute.
16.9.In such a case, the High Court may quash the criminal proceeding ifin view ofthe compromise between the disputants, the possibility ofa conviction is remote and the continuation ofa criminalproceeding wouldcause oppression andprejudice;".
Since the dispute between,the parties has been amicably resolved, therefore, continuance of proceedings arising out ofthe FIR in question would be an exercise in futility.
Accordingly, this petition is allowed subject to costs of?10,000/- to be deposited by petitioners with Prime Minister's NationalReliefFund within a week from today. Upon placing on record the proofofdepqsit of costs within a week thereafter and handing over its copy to the
Investigating Officer,FIR No. 1598/2004,under Sections 102/103/104 of
Trade Mark Act, 1999 and Section 63 of Copyright Act, 1957 registered at police station Sultan Purl, Delhi and the proceedings emanating therefrom shall stand quashed qua petitioners.
This petition is accordingly disposed of.
Dasti.
(SUNIL GAUR)
JUDGE
MARCH 29,2019 p'ma iKaigiSJiinii Crl.M.C. 1677/2019 Page2of2
2019:DHC:7536
JUDGMENT