Delhi High Court
Deepak Kapil vs The State (Nct Of Delhi) & Anr on 20 February, 2019
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of Order: February 20, 2019
+ CRL.M.C. 955/2019 & Crl.M.A.3805/2019
DEEPAK KAPIL ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr.M.A.Niyazi, Advocate
versus
THE STATE (NCT OF DELHI) & ANR .....Respondents
Through: Ms. Neelam Sharma, Additional
Public Prosecutor for respondent-
State with SI Varun
Mr. Chatanya Siddharth, Advocate
with respondent No.2 in person
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR
ORDER
(ORAL)
Quashing of FIR No.95/2018, under Sections 420/406/34 of IPC
registered at Police Station Hauz Khas, New Delhi is sought on the basis
of Affidavit of 13th February, 2019 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 No.2, present in the Court, is
complainant/first-informant of the FIR in question and he has been
identified to be so, by his counsel as well as by SI Varun on the basis of
identity proof produced by him.
Respondent No.2, present in the Court, submits that the dispute
between the parties has been amicably resolved vide Deed of Settlement
of 16th May, 2018 (Annexure P/3) and the terms thereof have been fully
acted upon as today he has received a sum of ₹2.5 lacs by way of a
Cheque bearing No. 203665 dated 20th February, 2019 and that the
misunderstanding, which led to the incident in question, now stands
cleared between the parties. Respondent No.2 affirms the contents of
aforesaid Deed of Settlement and of his affidavit of 13th February, 2019
supporting this petition and submits that now no dispute with petitioner
survives and so, the proceedings arising out of the FIR in question be
brought to an end provided the aforesaid cheque is realized.
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;"
Upon hearing and on perusal of the FIR 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, now stands cleared between the parties.
Accordingly, this petition is allowed subject to costs of `50,000/-
to be deposited by petitioner with Prime Minister's National Relief Fund
within four weeks from today. Upon placing on record the receipt of cost
and tendering its copy to Investigating Officer of this case, FIR
No.95/2018, under Sections 420/406/34 of IPC registered at Police
Station Hauz Khas, New Delhi and the proceedings emanating therefrom
shall stand quashed qua petitioner only provided the aforesaid cheque
issued by petitioner to respondent No.2 is duly honoured.
This petition and the application are accordingly disposed of.
Dasti.
(SUNIL GAUR)
JUDGE
FEBRAURY 20, 2019
s
