Delhi High Court
Dinesh Chand Singhal & Ors. vs The State (Govt Of Nct Of Delhi) & ... on 13 January, 2015
Author: Sunil Gaur
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of Decision: January 13, 2015
+ CRL.M.C. 107/2015 & Crl.M.As.471-72/2015
DINESH CHAND SINGHAL & ORS ..... Petitioners
Through: Mr. R.P.S. Bhatti, Advocate
versus
THE STATE (GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI) & ANR. ..Respondents
Through: Mr. Parveen Bhati, Additional
Public Prosecutor for respondent-
State with SI Vinod
Mr. P.M. Bhatt, Advocate, with
respondent No.2 in person
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR
JUDGMENT
% (ORAL)
Quashing of FIR No.141/2013, under Sections 498-A/406/34 of
IPC registered at police station Pahar Ganj, Delhi is sought on the basis
of Settlement/Agreement of 24th July, 2013 arrived at Delhi Mediation
Centre, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi (Annexure P-2).
Notice.
Mr. Praveen Bhati, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for
respondent-State accepts notice and Mr. P.M. Bhatt, Advocate, accepts
notice on behalf of respondent No.2.
Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent-State submits
that respondent No.2, present in the Court, is complainant/first-informant
of the FIR in question and she has been identified to be so by her counsel
CRL.M.C. 107/2015 Page 1
as well as by SI Vinod 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
Settlement/Agreement and terms thereof have been fully acted upon as
today, she has received the balance settled amount of `1.5 lac in cash and
that divorce by mutual consent has been already granted by the family
court on 4th July, 2014. Respondent No.2 affirms the contents of aforesaid
Settlement/Agreement and of her affidavit of 18th December, 2014
supporting 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.
In „Gian Singh Vs State of Punjab‟ (2012) 10 SCC 303, Apex
Court has recognized the need of amicable resolution of disputes in cases
like the instant one, by observing as under:-
"Resolution of a dispute by way of a
compromise between two warring groups, therefore,
should attract the immediate and prompt attention of a
court which should endeavour to give full effect to the
same unless such compromise is abhorrent to lawful
composition of the society or would promote savagery.
Where the High Court quashes a criminal
proceeding having regard to the fact that the dispute
between the offender and the victim has been settled
although the offences are not compoundable, it does so
as in its opinion, continuation of criminal proceedings
will be an exercise in futility and justice in the case
demands that the dispute between the parties is put to
an end and peace is restored; securing the ends of
justice being the ultimate guiding factor."
Since the subject matter of this FIR is essentially matrimonial,
CRL.M.C. 107/2015 Page 2
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, this petition is allowed and FIR No.141/2013, under
Sections 498-A/406/34 of IPC registered at police station Pahar Ganj,
Delhi and the proceedings emanating therefrom are quashed qua
petitioners.
This petition and the applications are accordingly disposed of.
(SUNIL GAUR)
JUDGE
JANUARY 13, 2015
s
CRL.M.C. 107/2015 Page 3
