Mukesh Kumar Chauhan & Ors vs The State (Nct) Delhi & Anr
2019 Latest Caselaw 1199 Del

*      IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
                                       Date of Order: February 22, 2019

+      CRL.M.C. 1019/2019 and CRL.M.A.s 4053-4054/2019
       MUKESH KUMAR CHAUHAN & ORS                          .....Petitioners
                         Through:     Mr. R.C. Sharma, Advocate

                         Versus

       THE STATE (NCT) DELHI & ANR                       .....Respondents

                         Through:     Mr. M.S. Oberoi, Additional
                                      Public Prosecutor for State with SI
                                      Inderpal Singh
                                      Ms. Shilpi Singhal, Advocate with
                                      Respondent No. 2 in person.
       CORAM:
       HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR
                    ORDER

(ORAL) Quashing of FIR No. 24/2012, under Sections 498-A/406 of IPC registered at police station Madhu Vihar, Delhi is sought on the basis of Mediated Settlement of 14th September, 2018 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 Inderpal Singh 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 Mediated Settlement of 14th September, 2018 and terms thereof have been fully

acted upon as today, she has received the settled amount of ₹3,00,000/- by way of Demand Draft bearing No. 872453 of 8th February, 2019. Respondent No.2 affirms the contents of aforesaid Mediated Settlement of 14th September, 2018 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 the 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 ₹10,000/- to be deposited by petitioners with Prime Minister's National Relief Fund

within two weeks from today. Upon placing on record the proof of deposit of costs a week thereafter and handing over its copy to the Investigating Officer, FIR No. 24/2012, under Sections 498-A/406 of IPC registered at police station Madhu Vihar, Delhi and the proceedings emanating therefrom shall stand quashed qua petitioners.

This petition and applications are accordingly disposed of. Dasti.

(SUNIL GAUR) JUDGE FEBRUARY 22, 2019 p'ma