Delhi High Court
Ashok Gupta & Anr. vs The State (Govt Of Nct Of Delhi) & ... on 27 January, 2015
Author: Sunil Gaur
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of Decision: January 27, 2015
+ CRL.M.C. 4967/2014
ASHOK GUPTA & ANR ..... Petitioners
Through: Mr. B.S. Randhawa and Mr.
Pukhraj, Advocates
versus
THE STATE (GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI) & ANR
.....Respondents
Through: Mr.Karan Singh, Additional Public
Prosecutor for respondent-State
with Inspector Ravi Kant
Respondent No.2 in person
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR
JUDGMENT
% (ORAL)
Quashing of FIR No.508/2005, under Sections 448/427/380/341/34
of IPC registered at police station Sarita Vihar, Delhi is sought on the
basis of Compromise Deed/Settlement of 6th September, 2014 and on the
ground that the misunderstanding which led to registration of the FIR
now stands cleared between the parties.
Upon notice, respondent No.2 has appeared in the Court and has
been identified to be complainant/first-informant of the FIR in question
by SI Ravi Kant on the basis of identity proof produced by her.
Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent-State submits
CRL.M.C. 4967/2014 Page 1
on instructions that a closure report in this FIR case has been filed but the
protest petition is still pending before the trial court.
Respondent No.2, present in the Court, submits that the dispute
between the parties has been amicably resolved vide aforesaid
Compromise Deed/Settlement and the terms thereof have been fully acted
upon and she has been duly compensated to the tune of `50,000/- by way
of demand draft bearing No.213660 of 27th January, 2015 and that the
misunderstanding, which led to the incident in question, now stands
cleared between the parties. Respondent No.2 affirms the contents of
aforesaid Compromise Deed/Settlement and of her affidavit of 28th
October, 2014 supporting this petition and submits that now no dispute
with petitioners survives and so, to restore the cordiality amongst the
parties, 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 peculiar facts and circumstances of this case and in view of
CRL.M.C. 4967/2014 Page 2
the affidavit of respondent No.2, I find that continuance of proceedings
arising out of the FIR in question would be an exercise in futility as the
misunderstanding, which led to registration of the FIR, now stands
cleared between the parties.
Accordingly, this petition is allowed subject to cost of `20,000/-
which stands paid to respondent No.2 by petitioners. Consequentially,
FIR No.508/2005, under Sections 448/427/380/ 341/34 of IPC registered
at police station Sarita Vihar, Delhi and the proceedings emanating
therefrom stands quashed qua petitioners.
This petition is accordingly disposed of.
Dasti.
(SUNIL GAUR)
JUDGE
JANUARY 27, 2015
s
CRL.M.C. 4967/2014 Page 3
