Delhi High Court
Fayaz Ahmed Khan & Ors. vs State & Anr. on 19 January, 2015
Author: Sunil Gaur
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of Decision: January 19, 2015
+ CRL.M.C. 187/2015
FAYAZ AHMED KHAN & ORS ..... Petitioners
Through: Mr. Tabrez Alam, Advocate
versus
STATE & ANR .....Respondents
Through: Mr. Karan Singh, Additional
Public Prosecutor for respondent-
State with SI Vineet Singh
Mr. M. Shuaeb Saifuddin,
Advocate with respondent No.2 in
person
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR
JUDGMENT
% (ORAL)
Quashing of FIR No.238/2004, under Sections 498-A/406/34 of
IPC registered at police station Geeta Colony, Delhi is sought on the
basis of Mediated Settlement of 3rd December, 2013 arrived at Family
Court.
Notice.
Mr. Karan Singh, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for
respondent-State accepts notice and Mr. M. Shuae Saifuddin, Advocate,
accepts notice on behalf of respondent No.2.
Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent-State submits
CRL.M.C. 187/2015 Page 1
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
as well as by SI Vineet Singh 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 and terms thereof have been fully acted upon as today, she has
received the balance settled amount of `2.5 lac by way of Banker's
Cheque bearing No.891488 of 6th January, 2015 and that divorce by has
been already obtained by the parties. Respondent No.2 affirms the
contents of aforesaid Mediated Settlement and of her affidavit of 15th
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
CRL.M.C. 187/2015 Page 2
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,
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.238/2004, under
Sections 498-A/406/34 of IPC registered at police station Geeta Colony,
Delhi and the proceedings emanating therefrom are quashed qua
petitioners.
This petition is accordingly disposed of.
(SUNIL GAUR)
JUDGE
JANUARY 19, 2015
s
CRL.M.C. 187/2015 Page 3
