Delhi High Court
Shri Titoo Chadha & Ors. vs State & Anr. on 28 February, 2019
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of Order: February 28, 2019
+ CRL.M.C. 1168/2019
SHRI TITOO CHADHA & ORS. ..... Petitioners
Through: Mr. Brijesh Kumar, Advocate.
Versus
STATE & ANR. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Izhar Ahmed, Additional
Public Prosecutor for respondent
No.1-State with SI Anand Prakash
Mr. Sanjay Verma & Ms. Kavita
Chopra, Advocates with
respondent No.2 in person.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR
ORDER
(ORAL)
Quashing of FIR No. 1038/2014, under Sections 406/498-A/34
IPC, registered at police station Tilak Nagar, Delhi is sought on the basis
of affidavit of 20th February, 2019 of respondent No.2
Upon notice, Mr. Izhar Ahmed, Additional Public Prosecutor for
respondent No.1-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 her counsel as well as by SI Anand Prakash
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, as today she has received
amount of ₹1,00,000/-by way of demand draft bearing No. 459221, dated
7th February, 2019, drawn on Vijaya Bank, Branch Uttam Nagar, Delhi
from petitioners. She affirms the contents of her affidavit of 20th
February, 2019 filed in support of 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.
Accordingly, this petition is allowed subject to costs of ₹30,000/-
to be deposited by petitioners with Prime Minister's National Relief Fund
within one 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. 1038/2014, under Sections 406/498-A/34
IPC, registered at police station Tilak Nagar, Delhi and the proceedings
emanating therefrom shall stand quashed.
This petition is accordingly disposed of.
Dasti.
(SUNIL GAUR)
JUDGE
FEBRUARY 28, 2019
r
