Delhi High Court
Vishnu Kumar Mishra @ Deepak ... vs State & Ors. on 20 January, 2015
Author: Sunil Gaur
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of Decision: January 20, 2015
+ CRL.M.C. 1914/2014
VISHNU KUMAR MISHRA @ DEEPAK MISHRA & ORS
..... Petitioners
Through: Mr.J.P. Tiwari, Advocate
versus
STATE & ORS .....Respondents
Through: Mr. Vinod Diwakar, Additional
Public Prosecutor for respondent-
State with ASI Jagdish
Respondents No.2, 4-6 & 8 in
person
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR
JUDGMENT
% (ORAL)
Quashing of FIR No.335/2013, under Sections 308/34 of IPC
registered at Police Station New Usmanpur, Delhi is sought on the ground
that the misunderstanding, which led to registration of the FIR now,
stands cleared between the parties.
Notice.
Mr. Vinod Diwakar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for
respondent-State accepts notice and submits that apart from respondents
No.3 & 7, parties are present in the Court have been identified to be so by
their respective counsel as well as by ASI Jagdish on the basis of identity
proofs produced by them.
CRL.M.C. 1914/2014 Page 1
Respondent No.2, present in the Court, submits that he has
instructions from respondents No.3 and 7 to give no objection to the
quashing of the FIR in question on their behalf. Respondent No.2, 4-6 &
8, present in the Court, as well as respondent No.2 on behalf of
respondents No.3 & 7, submit that the misunderstanding, which led to the
incident in question, now stands cleared and it is submitted on behalf of
respondents-complainant that the petitioners are their neighbours.
Respondents-complainant, present in the Court, affirm the factum of
Settlement and contents of their affidavits filed in support of this petition
and submit that now no dispute with petitioners survives and so, to
restore the cordiality amongst the parties, who are neighbours, 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:-
"61. In other words, the High Court must consider
whether it would be unfair or contrary to the interest of justice
to continue with the criminal proceedings or continuation of
criminal proceedings would tantamount to abuse of process of
law despite settlement and compromise between the victim and
the wrongdoer and whether to secure the ends of justice, it is
appropriate that criminal case is put to an end and if the
answer to the above question(s) is in the affirmative, the High
Court shall be well within its jurisdiction to quash the criminal
proceedings."
In the facts and circumstances of this case and in view of the fact
that the misunderstanding, which led to registration of the FIR, now
stands cleared between the parties, I find that continuance of proceedings
CRL.M.C. 1914/2014 Page 2
arising out of the FIR in question would be an exercise in futility.
Accordingly, this petition is allowed and FIR No.335/2013, under
Sections 308/34 of IPC registered at Police Station New Usmanpur, Delhi
and the proceedings emanating therefrom are quashed qua petitioners.
This petition is accordingly disposed of.
(SUNIL GAUR)
JUDGE
JANUARY 20, 2015
s
CRL.M.C. 1914/2014 Page 3
