Delhi High Court
Sayed Mashhood Ahmad vs The State Of Nct Of Delhi & Ors on 5 August, 2019
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of Order: August 05, 2019
+ CRL.M.C. 3825/2019 & CRL.M.A. 32758/2019
SAYED MASHHOOD AHMAD ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Ahmad Waseem, Advocate
Versus
THE STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS .....Respondents
Through: Mr. Izhar Ahmad, Additional
Public Prosecutor for State with SI
C.P. Singh.
Respondent Nos. 2 to 4 in person.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR
ORDER
(ORAL)
Quashing of FIR No. 1126/2015, under Sections 354-A/323/506 of
IPC, registered at Police Station Jamia Nagar, Delhi is sought on the basis
of affidavits of respondent Nos. 2 to 4 and on the ground that the
misunderstanding which led to registration of the FIR in question, now
stands cleared between the parties.
Upon notice, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent-
State submits that respondent Nos. 2 to 4, who are present in Court, are
the complainants of FIR in question and they have been identified to be
so, by SI C.P. Singh, on the basis of identity proof produced by them.
Respondent Nos. 2 to 4, present in the Court submit that the
misunderstanding between the parties has been amicably resolved. They
affirm the contents of their affidavits and submit that the
misunderstanding, which led to registration of the FIR in question, now
stands cleared between the parties and now, no grievance against
petitioner survives and so, to restore cordiality amongst the parties, who
are family friends, 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."
In the facts and circumstances of this case, I find that continuance
of proceedings arising out of the FIR in question would be an exercise in
futility as the misunderstanding, which led to registration of the FIR in
question, now stands cleared amongst the parties.
Consequentially, this petition is allowed subject to costs of
₹10,000/- to be deposited by petitioner 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. 1126/2015, under Sections 354-
A/323/506 of IPC, registered at Police Station Jamia Nagar, Delhi and the
proceedings emanating therefrom shall stand quashed qua petitioner.
This petition and application are accordingly disposed of.
Dasti.
(SUNIL GAUR)
JUDGE
AUGUST 05, 2019
p'ma
