Full Text
Translation output
CRL. M.C. 1000/2019
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Date of Order: February 22, 2019
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Date of Order: February 22, 2019
CRL.M.C. 1000/2019 and CRL.M.As. 3994-3995/2019
NAVY CHARLIE ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Gulshan Jahan, Advocate.
NAVY CHARLIE ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Gulshan Jahan, Advocate.
VERSUS
STATE & ANR. .....Respondents
Through: Mr. Izhar Ahmad, Additional Public Prosecutor for State with SI
Hemant Ms. Anitha, Advocate with Respondent No. 2 in person.
Through: Mr. Izhar Ahmad, Additional Public Prosecutor for State with SI
Hemant Ms. Anitha, Advocate with Respondent No. 2 in person.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR O R D E R (ORAL)
Quashing of FIR No. 888/2014, under Sections 498-A/406 of IPC registered at police station Vasant Kunj North, New Delhi is sought on the basis of Mediated Settlement of 31st July, 2018 reached between the parties.
Upon notice, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent-
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 SI Hemant 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 Mediated
Settlement of 31st July, 2018 and terms thereof have been fully acted
2019:DHC:1248 upon. Respondent No.2 affirms the contents of her affidavit of 18th February, 2019 supporting this petition and submits that she is happily living with petitioner since July, 2018 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 the parties, therefore, continuance of proceedings arising out of the FIR in question would be an exercise in futility.
Accordingly, FIR No. 888/2014, under Sections 498-A/406 of IPC registered at police station Vasant Kunj North, New Delhi and the proceedings emanating therefrom stand quashed qua petitioner. However, it is made clear that if the marriage of respondent No.2 with petitioner- husband again runs into rough weather, then this order will not stand in her way to have recourse to law.
This petition and applications are accordingly disposed of.
Dasti.
(SUNIL GAUR)
JUDGE
FEBRUARY 22, 2019 p’ma
Quashing of FIR No. 888/2014, under Sections 498-A/406 of IPC registered at police station Vasant Kunj North, New Delhi is sought on the basis of Mediated Settlement of 31st July, 2018 reached between the parties.
Upon notice, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent-
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 SI Hemant 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 Mediated
Settlement of 31st July, 2018 and terms thereof have been fully acted
2019:DHC:1248 upon. Respondent No.2 affirms the contents of her affidavit of 18th February, 2019 supporting this petition and submits that she is happily living with petitioner since July, 2018 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 the parties, therefore, continuance of proceedings arising out of the FIR in question would be an exercise in futility.
Accordingly, FIR No. 888/2014, under Sections 498-A/406 of IPC registered at police station Vasant Kunj North, New Delhi and the proceedings emanating therefrom stand quashed qua petitioner. However, it is made clear that if the marriage of respondent No.2 with petitioner- husband again runs into rough weather, then this order will not stand in her way to have recourse to law.
This petition and applications are accordingly disposed of.
Dasti.
(SUNIL GAUR)
JUDGE
FEBRUARY 22, 2019 p’ma
JUDGMENT