Delhi High Court
Mr. Prashant Agarwal & Ors. vs State & Anr. on 1 April, 2019
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of Order: April 01, 2019
+ CRL.M.C. 1705/2019
MR. PRASHANT AGARWAL & ORS. .....Petitioners
Through: Mr. H.S. Dhillon, Advocate
Versus
STATE & ANR. .....Respondents
Through: Mr. Izhar Ahmad, Additional
Public Prosecutor for State with
W/SI Sneh Lata.
Ms. Meera Menon, Advocate with
Special Attorney-Mr. Rajiv
Dhingra, father of Respondent No.
2.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR
ORDER
(ORAL)
Quashing of FIR No. 152/2018, under Sections 498-A/377/354/34
of IPC, registered at police station Malviya Nagar, New Delhi is sought
on the basis of settlement agreement of 28th January, 2019 reached
between the parties.
Mr. Rajiv Dhingra, father of respondent No. 2, who is complainant
of FIR in question is present in the court and he submits that his daughter
i.e. respondent No. 2 has given Special Power of Attorney in his favour to
appear on her behalf. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for
respondent-State submits that Mr. Rajiv Dhingra, has been duly identified
to be father of respondent No. 2, by W/SI Sneh Lata on the basis of
identity proof produced by him.
Attorney holder of Respondent No.2, submits that the dispute
between the parties has been amicably resolved as today, an amount of
₹25,00,000/- by way of a demand draft bearing No. 001809 dated 27th
March, 2019 drawn on HDFC Bank, Neb Sarai Branch New Delhi in the
name of his daughter has been received from petitioners. He submits that
divorce by mutual consent has been already granted to the parties by the
family court on 7th March, 2019. He submits that he has instructions from
respondent No. 2 to submit that now no dispute with petitioners survives
and so, the proceedings arising out of the FIR in question be brought to
an end.
Supreme Court in Parbatbhai Aahir @ Parbatbhai Bhimsinhbhai
Vs. State of Gujarat (2017) 9 SCC 641 has reiterated the parameters for
exercising inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of
FIR/criminal complaint, which are as under:-
"16.7. As distinguished from serious offences, there may be
criminal cases which have an overwhelming or predominant
element of a civil dispute. They stand on a distinct footing insofar
as the exercise of the inherent power to quash is concerned.
16.8. Criminal cases involving offences which arise from
commercial, financial, mercantile, partnership or similar
transactions with an essentially civil flavour may in appropriate
situations fall for quashing where parties have settled the dispute.
16.9. In such a case, the High Court may quash the criminal
proceeding if in view of the compromise between the disputants,
the possibility of a conviction is remote and the continuation of a
criminal proceeding would cause oppression and prejudice;"
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, this petition is allowed subject to costs of ₹10,000/-
to be deposited by petitioners with Prime Minister's National Relief Fund
within a week from today. Upon placing on record the proof of deposit of
costs within a week thereafter and handing over its copy to the
Investigating Officer, FIR No. 152/2018, under Sections 498-
A/377/354/34 of IPC, registered at police station Malviya Nagar, New
Delhi and the proceedings emanating therefrom shall stand quashed qua
petitioners.
This petition is accordingly disposed of.
Dasti.
(SUNIL GAUR)
JUDGE
APRIL 01, 2019
p'ma
