Delhi High Court
Praveen Singh Negi & Ors vs The State & Anr on 20 February, 2019
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of Order: February 20, 2019
+ CRL.M.C. 957/2019
PRAVEEN SINGH NEGI & ORS .....Petitioners
Through: Mr. Ashwani Kumar, Advocate
versus
THE STATE & ANR .....Respondents
Through: Mr. Izhar Ahmad, Additional
Public Prosecutor with SI Bijender
Mr. A.K.Dubey, Advocate with
Respondent No. 2 in person
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR
ORDER
(ORAL)
CRL.M.A. 3808/2019 (Exemption)
Allowed subject to all just exceptions.
CRL.M.C. 957/2019
Quashing of FIR No. 189/2012, under Sections 498A/406/34 of
IPC, registered at Police Station Swaroop Nagar, Delhi is sought on the
basis of Affidavit of 26th November, 2018 of respondent No. 2 reached
between the parties.
Upon notice, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent-
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 Bijender on the basis of identity proof produced by her.
CRL.M.C. 957/2019 Page 1
Respondent No.2, present in the Court, submits that the dispute
between the parties has been amicably resolved as today, she has received
the settled amount of ₹2,00,000/- by way of Demand Draft of 28th
November, 2018 of State Bank of India, Nangli Sakrawati, Delhi.
Respondent No.2 affirms the contents of her affidavit of 26th November,
2018 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 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.
CRL.M.C. 957/2019 Page 2
Accordingly, this petition is allowed, subject to costs of ₹10,000/-
to be deposited by petitioners with Prime Minister's National Relief Fund
within two weeks from today. Upon placing on record the receipt of costs
and tendering its copy to the Investigating Officer, FIR No. 189/2012,
under Sections 498A/406/34 of IPC, registered at Police Station Swaroop
Nagar, Delhi and the proceedings emanating therefrom shall stand
quashed qua petitioners.
This petition is accordingly disposed of.
Dasti.
(SUNIL GAUR)
JUDGE
FEBRAURY 20, 2019
v
CRL.M.C. 957/2019 Page 3
