Manjit Singh Kocher & Ors vs The State & Anr
2019 Latest Caselaw 2238 Del

*     IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
                             Date of Order: April 29, 2019

+     CRL.M.C. 2290/2019
      MANJIT SINGH KOCHER & ORS                  .....Petitioners
                     Through: Mr. Vineet Jain, Advocate

                          Versus

      THE STATE & ANR                                      .....Respondents
                    Through:            Mr. M.S. Oberoi, Additional
                                        Public Prosecutor for State with SI
                                        Dev Kumar
                                        Mr.H.S. Sasan, Advocate with
                                        respondent No. 2 in person
      CORAM:
      HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR
                   ORDER

(ORAL)

CRL.M.As.9072-73/2019 (Exemption)

Allowed subject to all just exceptions.

CRL.M.C. 2290/2019

Quashing of FIR No.1243/2014, under Sections 498-A/406/34 of IPC, registered at police station Janak Puri, Delhi is sought on the basis of Settlement Deed of 13th November, 2018.

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 Dev 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 as today, she has received an amount ₹10,00,000/- by way of two demand drafts bearing No. 970756 and 970757 dated 12th April, 2019 drawn on South Indian Bank, Rajouri Garden Branch, Delhi from petitioners. She affirms the contents of her affidavit of 16th April, 2019 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.

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 proceedings, 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 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.1243/2014, under Sections 498-A/406/34 of IPC, registered at police station Janak Pui, Delhi and the proceedings emanating therefrom shall stand quashed qua petitioners.

This petition is accordingly disposed of.

(SUNIL GAUR) JUDGE APRIL 29, 2019 v