Paramjeet vs State Of Nct Delhi & Ors
2014 Latest Caselaw 4246 Del

$~33
*    IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+        CRL.M.C. 4063/2014

         PARAMJEET                                  ..... Petitioner
             Through         Mr. Jitender Kumar and Mr. Karan Sharma,
                             Advocates.

                             versus

         STATE OF NCT DELHI & ORS               ..... Respondents
             Through   Ms. Nish Jain, Additional Public Prosecutor.
                       Sub Inspector Desh Raj. P.S. Govind Puri.
                       Mr. Deepak Pathak and Ms. Astha Sharma,
                       Advocates for BSES.

         CORAM:
         HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDERSHAN KUMAR MISRA

%        SUDERSHAN KUMAR MISRA, J. (Oral)

1. This petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeks quashing of FIR No.50/2013 registered under Section 135 of the Indian Electricity (Amend) Act, 2003 and Section 379 IPC at police station Govind Puri, on the ground that the matter has been settled between the parties.

2. Issue notice.

Ms. Nishi Jain, Additional Public Prosecutor for the State, as well as Mr. Deepak Pathak, Advocate for the complainant/ BSES, accept notice.

3. It is stated that the charge sheet has been filed in the matter, however, the petitioner has since made a complete payment of the assessment bill in terms of the relevant bill dated 04.12.2012, and consequently, the complainant is no longer interested in pursuing the matter.

4. Counsel for the BSES/complainant also affirms the fact that the entire payment, as envisaged under the Act and the Rules, has been received; and

that, his client has no objection to the proceedings being closed.

5. Counsel for the State submits that looking to the circumstances; and since the complainant is no longer interested in pursuing the matter, no useful purpose will be served in continuing with the proceedings.

6. Under the circumstances, and looking to the decision of the Supreme Court in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, (2012) 10 SCC 303, which has referred to a number of matters for the proposition that even a non- compoundable offence can also be quashed on the ground of a settlement agreement between the offender and the victim, if the circumstances so warrant; by observing as under:

"58. ....However, certain offences which overwhelmingly and predominantly bear civil flavour having arisen out of civil, mercantile, commercial, financial, partnership or such like transactions or the offences arising out of matrimony, particularly relating to dowry, etc. or the family dispute, where the wrong is basically to the victim and the offender and the victim have settled all disputes between them amicably, irrespective of the fact that such offences have not been made compoundable, the High Court may within the framework of its inherent power, quash the criminal proceeding or criminal complaint or FIR if it is satisfied that on the face of such settlement, there is hardly any likelihood of the offender being convicted and by not quashing the criminal proceedings, justice shall be casualty and ends of justice shall be defeated."

I am of the opinion that the aforesaid bill has been duly paid, and the complainant is not interested in pursuing the matter any further, it is best if a

quietus is given to the matter.

7. Consequently, the petition is allowed, and FIR No.50/2013 registered under Section 135 of the Indian Electricity (Amend) Act, 2003 and Section 379 IPC at police station Govind Puri, and all proceedings arising therefrom, are hereby quashed.

8. The petition is disposed off.

SUDERSHAN KUMAR MISRA, J SEPTEMBER 08, 2014 dr