Delhi High Court
Sh. Joginder Kumar @ Jonny vs The State & Ors.(Nct Of Delhi) on 15 July, 2019
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of Order: July 15, 2019
+ CRL.M.C. 3327/2019
SH. JOGINDER KUMAR @ JONNY .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Basant Kr. Gautam and
Mr. Siddharth, Advocates.
versus
THE STATE & ORS.(NCT OF DELHI) .....Respondents
Through: Mr. M.S.Oberoi, Additional Public
Prosecutor for respondent-State
with SI Gajender.
Respondent No. 2 in person.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR
ORDER
(ORAL)
CRL.M.A. 30904/2019 (Exemption)
Allowed subject to all just exceptions.
CRL.M.C. 3327/2019
Quashing of FIR No.561/2014 under Sections 323/452/354-A of
IPC, registered at Police Station Bawana, Delhi is sought on the basis of
affidavit of 10th July, 2019 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 she has been identified
to be so, by SI Gajender, on the basis of identity proof produced by her.
Respondent No. 2 present in the Court, affirms the contents of her
affidavit of 10th July, 2019 and submits that the misunderstanding, which
led to registration of the FIR in question, now stands cleared between the
parties and now, no grievance against petitioner survives and so, to
restore cordiality between the parties, who are residents of the same
locality, 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 between the parties.
Accordingly, this petition is allowed subject to costs of ₹10,000/-
to be deposited by petitioner with Prime Minister's National Relief Fund
within two weeks 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.561/14 under Sections 323/452/354-A of
IPC, registered at Police Station Bawana, Delhi and the proceedings
emanating therefrom shall stand quashed qua petitioner.
This petition is accordingly disposed of.
Dasti.
(SUNIL GAUR)
JUDGE
JULY 15, 2019
v
