Delhi High Court
Devender Singh & Anr. vs State (Govt Of Nct Of Delhi) & Anr. on 18 December, 2018
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of Order: December 18, 2018
+ CRL.M.C. 6455/2018 & Crl.M.A 50022/2018
DEVENDER SINGH & ANR. ..... Petitioners
Through: Mr. Sundaram, Advocate with
petitioners in person
Versus
STATE (GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI) & ANR. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Izhar Ahmed, Additional
Public Prosecutor for respondent-State with ASI
Amit Kumar
Respondent No.2 in person with
Mr. R.P.Prajapati, Advocate
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR
ORDER
(ORAL)
1. In this petition, quashing of FIR No.174/2013, under Sections 498-
A/406/34 of IPC, registered at police station Civil Lines, Delhi is sought
by petitioners.
2. Notice.
3. Mr. Izhar Ahmed, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for
respondent-State accepts notice and Mr. R.P.Prajapati, Advocate, accepts
notice on behalf of respondent No.2.
4. 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
as well as by ASI Amit Kumar.
5. Counsel for petitioners submits that the dispute between the parties
is a matrimonial dispute, which has been amicably resolved and the terms
of settlement are indicated in the joint statement of 21st August, 2018 of
the parties recorded by concerned Family Court.
6. Respondent No.2, present in the Court, submits that the terms of
settlement have been fully acted upon as today, she has received the
balance settled amount of ₹2,00,000/- by way of demand draft bearing
No.325509, dated 18th December, 2018, drawn on Axis Bank, Branch
Khan Market, New Delhi and that divorce by mutual consent has been
already granted by the family court on 25th May, 2018. Respondent No.2
affirms the contents of her affidavit of 14th November, 2018 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.
7. 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."
8. 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, FIR No.174/2013, under
Sections 498-A/406/34 of IPC, registered at police station Civil Lines,
Delhi and the proceedings emanating therefrom are quashed subject to
petitioners depositing cost of `25,000/- with Prime Minister‟s Relief
Fund within four weeks from today. The receipt of deposit of cost be
placed on record within two weeks thereafter.
9. With aforesaid directions, this petition and application are
accordingly disposed of.
(SUNIL GAUR)
JUDGE
DECEMBER18, 2018
r
