Delhi High Court
Mangal Mal vs State & Anr. on 20 December, 2018
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of Order: December 20, 2018
+ CRL.M.C. 6517/2018
MANGAL MAL ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. A.K.Sheoran, Advocate
Versus
STATE & ANR. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. M.S.Oberoi, Additional Public
Prosecutor for respondent-State with WSI
Vinod Kapoor
Respondent No.2 in person with Mr. Hem
Kumar, Advocate
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR
ORDER
(ORAL)
1. Quashing of FIR No.731/2014, under Sections 354/506 IPC
registered at police station Vasant Vihar, New Delhi is sought on the
basis of Memorandum of Understanding of 4th December, 2018
(Annexure P-5).
2. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent-State submits
that respondent No.2 is the complainant of the FIR in question and she is
present in the Court and she has been identified to be so, by WSI Vinod
Kapoor. Complainant submits that Memorandum of Understanding of 4th
December, 2018 (Annexure P-5) has been acted upon and affirms the
contents of her affidavit supporting this petition and submits that now no
dispute with petitioner survives and so, proceedings arising out of FIR in
question be brought to an end.
3. In „Gian Singh Vs State of Punjab‟ (2012) 10 SCC 303, Supreme
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."
4. The aforesaid dictum stands reiterated by the Supreme Court in
later decision in Narinder Singh v. State of Punjab (2014) 6 SCC 466.
5. Upon hearing and on perusal of Status Report filed by Additional
Public Prosecutor for respondent-State, I find that continuance of
proceedings arising out of FIR in question against petitioner would serve
no purpose.
6. In the light of aforesaid, FIR No.731/2014, under Sections 354/506
IPC of IPC, registered at police station Vasant Vihar, New Delhi and
proceedings emanating therefrom are quashed, subject to petitioner
depositing cost of `20,000/- with Prime Minister‟s National Relief Fund
within four weeks from today. The receipt of deposit of cost be placed on
record of this case as well as before the trial court within two weeks
thereafter.
7. This petition is accordingly disposed of in aforesaid terms.
(SUNIL GAUR)
JUDGE
DECEMBER 20, 2018
r
