Delhi High Court
Mukesh & Ors. vs The State & Anr. on 28 February, 2019
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of Order: February 28, 2019
+ CRL.M.C. 1181/2019
MUKESH & ORS. ..... Petitioners
Through: Mr. Nikhil Rastogi & Mr. Vinod
Nagpal, Advocates
Versus
THE STATE & ANR. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Izhar Ahmed, Additional
Public Prosecutor for respondent
No.1-State with SI Rajinder Pal
Respondent No.2 in person
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR
ORDER
(ORAL)
Quashing of FIR No. 233/2013, under Sections 498-A/406/34 of
IPC, registered at police station Delhi Cantt., Delhi is sought on the basis
of Affidavit of 15th February, 2019 of respondent No. 2.
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 she has been
identified to be so, by SI Rajinder Pal 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 and she is happily living
with petitioner-husband for last two years. Respondent No.2 affirms the
contents of her aforesaid Affidavit of 15th February, 2019 supporting this
petition and submits that to restore cordiality between the parties, 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, FIR No. 233/2013, under Sections 498-A/406/34 of
IPC, registered at police station Delhi Cantt., Delhi and the proceedings
emanating therefrom are hereby quashed with the rider that this order will
not stand in the way of respondent No. 2, incase her marriage with
petitioner-husband runs into rough weather again.
This petition is accordingly disposed of.
Dasti.
(SUNIL GAUR)
JUDGE
FEBRUARY 28, 2019
r
