Delhi High Court
Anil Sharma & Ors. vs State Of Nct Of Delhi & Ors on 25 February, 2019
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of Order: February 25, 2019
+ CRL.M.C. 1077/2019
ANIL SHARMA & ORS. .....Petitioners
Through: Mr. Mayank Mehandru and
Ms. Charu Tandon, Advocates
Versus
STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS .....Respondents
Through: Mr. Izhar Ahmad, Additional
Public Prosecutor for respondent-
State with SI Neeraj Kumar
Mr. Wasiq Khan and Mr. Shubham
Vishwakarma with respondents in
person
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR
ORDER
(ORAL)
CRL.M.A.4270/2019 (Exemption)
Allowed subject to all just exceptions.
CRL.M.C. 1077/2019
Quashing of FIR No. 1291/2015, under Sections 420/34/120B of
IPC registered at police station Kotla Mubarakpur, Delhi is sought on the
basis of Memorandum of Understanding of 30th January, 2019 and on the
ground that the misunderstanding which led to registration of the FIR,
now stands cleared between the parties.
Upon notice, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent-
State submits that respondents present in the Court, are
complainants/first-informants of the FIR in question and they have been
identified to be so, by their counsel as well as by SI Neeraj Kumar on the
basis of identity proof produced by them.
Respondents, present in the Court, affirm the contents of aforesaid
Memorandum of Understanding of 30th January, 2019 and their affidavits
supporting this petition. Respondents submit that the dispute between the
parties now stands amicably resolved 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 dispute between the parties has been amicably resolved,
therefore, continuance of proceedings arising out of the FIR in question
would be an exercise in futility.
Accordingly, FIR No. 1291/2015, under Sections 420/34/120B of
IPC registered at police station Kotla Mubarakpur, Delhi and the
proceedings emanating therefrom are hereby quashed.
This petition is accordingly disposed of.
Dasti.
(SUNIL GAUR)
JUDGE
FEBRAURY 25, 2019
v
