Pravesh Sharma & Ors vs The State Govt Of Nct Of Delhi & Anr.
2019 Latest Caselaw 3056 Del

*     IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
                              Date of Order: July 05, 2019

+     CRL.M.C. 4607/2017
      PRAVESH SHARMA & ORS                     .....Petitioners
                     Through: Mr. Raj Kumar, Advocate

                          versus

      THE STATE GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR.....Respondents
                   Through: Mr. Izhar Ahmad, Additional
                             Public Prosecutor for respondent-
                             State with ASI Naresh
                             Respondent No. 2 in person.
      CORAM:
      HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR

                          ORDER

(ORAL)

Quashing of FIR No. 117/2017 under Sections 308/324/452/34 of IPC, registered at Police Station Jafrabad, Delhi is sought on the basis of affidavit of 9th October, 2017 of respondent No. 2 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 the complainant/first informant of FIR in question and he has been identified to be so, by ASI Naresh, on the basis of identity proof produced by him.

Respondent No. 2 present in the Court, affirms the contents of his affidavit of 9th October, 2017 and submits that the misunderstanding, which led to registration of the FIR in question, now stands cleared

amongst the parties and now, no grievance against petitioners survives and so, to restore cordiality amongst the parties, who are related to each other, 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 proceedings, 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."

In the facts and circumstances 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 in question, now stands cleared amongst the parties.

Accordingly, this petition is allowed subject to costs of ₹10,000/- to be deposited by petitioners with Prime Minister's National Relief Fund within a 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. 117/2017 under Sections 308/324/452/34 of IPC, registered at Police Station Jafrabad, Delhi and the proceedings emanating therefrom shall stand quashed qua petitioners.

This petition is accordingly disposed of.

Dasti.

(SUNIL GAUR) JUDGE JULY 05, 2019 v