Delhi High Court
Deepak Rupani & Anr. vs State & Anr. on 7 January, 2015
Author: Sunil Gaur
$~33
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of Decision: January 07, 2015
+ CRL.M.C. 4997/2014
DEEPAK RUPANI & ANR .....Petitioners
Through: Mr.Fanish K. Jain, Advocate
versus
STATE & ANR .....Respondents
Through: Mr.Navin Sharma, Additional
Public Prosecutor for respondent-
State with SI Antriksha Alok
Mr. Vikas B. Pakhiddey, Advocate
with respondent No.2 in person
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR
JUDGMENT
(ORAL)
This is a petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. for quashing of FIR
No.26/2010 under Sections 420/427/447/468/471/506/120-B/511 of IPC
registered at P.S. Swaroop Nagar, Delhi.
Upon notice, Mr. Vikas B. Pakhiddey, Advocate, appears and
submits that respondent No.2, present in the Court, is the wife of
complainant/first-informant of the FIR in question. Respondent No.2,
present in the Court, has been identified to be so by SI Antriksha Alok on
the basis of identity proof furnished by her and it is submitted by SI
Antriksha Alok that complainant/first-informant of the FIR in question
i.e. husband of respondent No.2 has expired.
CRL.M.C. 4997/2014 Page 1
Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for State submits that the
charge-sheet in this FIR case has been filed for the offences under Section
420/427/447/506/120-B/511 of IPC.
Quashing of the aforesaid FIR is sought on the basis of the
Mediated Settlement of 26th July, 2014 (Annexure P-4) and affidavit of 5th
November, 2014 of respondent No.2.
Respondent No.2 submits that the Mediated Settlement has been
acted upon and affirms the contents of her affidavit and also submits that
the entire dispute between the parties now stands settled and there was no
forgery angle in respect of the transaction in question 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:-
"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."
CRL.M.C. 4997/2014 Page 2
In view of the facts and circumstances of this case and the
Mediated Settlement, which is duly supported by affidavit of respondent
No.2, I find that since the subject matter of this FIR is a commercial
dispute, which now stands mutually and amicably settled between parties
and there was no angle of forgery, 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.26/2010 under
Sections 420/427/447/468/471/506/120-B/511 of IPC registered at P.S.
Swaroop Nagar, Delhi and the proceedings emanating therefrom are
quashed qua petitioners subject to total cost of `40,000/- to be deposited
by both the petitioners with Prime Minister‟s Relief Fund within two
weeks from today and receipt regarding deposit of costs be placed on
record within one week thereafter.
This petition is accordingly disposed of.
(SUNIL GAUR)
JUDGE
JANUARY 07, 2015
s
CRL.M.C. 4997/2014 Page 3
