Delhi High Court
Sh. Sunil Kumar @ Bittu & Ors vs State & Anr. on 9 April, 2019
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of Order: April 09, 2019
+ CRL.M.C. 1907/2019 & CRL.M.A. 7565/2019
SH. SUNIL KUMAR @ BITTU & ORS .....Petitioners
Through: Mr. Manish Kumar, Advocate.
Versus
STATE & ANR. .....Respondents
Through: Mr. Izhar Ahmad, Additional
Public Prosecutor for State with SI
Kunal Kumar.
Mr. Sunil Dalal & Mr. Jaskaran
Singh, Advocates with Respondent
No. 2 in person.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR
ORDER
(ORAL)
Quashing of FIR No. 38/2017, under Sections 498-A/406/34 of
IPC, registered at Police Station Bindapur, New Delhi is sought on the
basis of Settlement of 2nd November, 2018 reached between the parties.
Upon notice, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent
No.1-State submits that respondent No.2, present in the Court, is the
complainant/first-informant of FIR in question and she has been
identified to be so, by SI Kunal Kumar on the basis of identity proof
produced by her.
Respondent No.2, present in the Court, submits that the dispute
between the parties has been amicably resolved vide aforesaid Settlement
of 2nd November, 2018 and terms thereof have been fully acted upon as
today, she has received an amount of ₹1,51,000/- by way of demand draft
bearing No. 012681 dated 14th March, 2019 drawn on HDFC Bank,
Branch Narela, Delhi and that divorce by mutual consent has been
already granted by the family court on 16th February, 2019. Respondent
No.2 affirms the contents of her affidavit of 1st April, 2019 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.
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 ₹30,000/-
to be deposited by petitioners with Prime Minister's National Relief Fund
within four weeks 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. 38/2017, under Sections 498-A/406/34 of
IPC, registered at Police Station Bindapur, New Delhi and the
proceedings emanating therefrom shall stand quashed qua petitioners.
This petition and application are accordingly disposed of.
Dasti.
(SUNIL GAUR)
JUDGE
APRIL 09, 2019
p'ma
