Full Text
Translation output
CRL.M.C. 1366/2019
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Date of Order: March 13, 2019
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Date of Order: March 13, 2019
CRL.M.C. 1366/2019 and CRL.M.As. 5430-5432/2019
IRSHAD & ORS. .....Petitioners
Through: Mr. Mohd. Atahar Khan, Advocate
IRSHAD & ORS. .....Petitioners
Through: Mr. Mohd. Atahar Khan, Advocate
VERSUS
STATE & ANR. .....Respondents
Through: Mr. M.P. Singh, Additional Public Prosecutor for State
Respondent No. 2 in person.
Through: Mr. M.P. Singh, Additional Public Prosecutor for State
Respondent No. 2 in person.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR O R D E R (ORAL)
Quashing of FIR No. 30/2016, under Sections 498-A/406/34 of
IPC, registered at police station Jamia Nagar, New Delhi is sought on the basis of Memorandum of Understanding/Settlement of 25th September, 2017 (Annexure P-3) reached between the parties.
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 learned Additional Public Prosecutor on the basis of identity proof produced by her.
Respondent No.2 present in the Court, submits that the dispute between the parties has been amicably resolved vide aforesaid
2019:DHC:1553 Memorandum of Understanding/Settlement of 25th September, 2017 (Annexure P-3) and terms thereof have been fully acted upon.
Respondent No. 2 affirms the contents of her affidavit of 18th December, 2018 filed in support of 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 complaint, which are as under:- 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 complaint, 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. 30/2016, under Sections 498-A/406/34 of
IPC, registered at police station Jamia Nagar, New Delhi and the proceedings emanating therefrom are hereby quashed.
This petition and applications are accordingly disposed of.
Dasti.
(SUNIL GAUR)
JUDGE
MARCH 13, 2019 p’ma
Quashing of FIR No. 30/2016, under Sections 498-A/406/34 of
IPC, registered at police station Jamia Nagar, New Delhi is sought on the basis of Memorandum of Understanding/Settlement of 25th September, 2017 (Annexure P-3) reached between the parties.
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 learned Additional Public Prosecutor on the basis of identity proof produced by her.
Respondent No.2 present in the Court, submits that the dispute between the parties has been amicably resolved vide aforesaid
2019:DHC:1553 Memorandum of Understanding/Settlement of 25th September, 2017 (Annexure P-3) and terms thereof have been fully acted upon.
Respondent No. 2 affirms the contents of her affidavit of 18th December, 2018 filed in support of 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 complaint, which are as under:- 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 complaint, 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. 30/2016, under Sections 498-A/406/34 of
IPC, registered at police station Jamia Nagar, New Delhi and the proceedings emanating therefrom are hereby quashed.
This petition and applications are accordingly disposed of.
Dasti.
(SUNIL GAUR)
JUDGE
MARCH 13, 2019 p’ma
JUDGMENT