Delhi High Court
Deepak Bajaj & Ors. vs State Of Nct Of Delhi & Anr. on 16 July, 2019
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of Order: July 16, 2019
+ CRL.M.C. 3371/2019
DEEPAK BAJAJ & ORS. .....Petitioners
Through: Mr. Vishal Gosain and Mr. N.
Ahuja, Advocates
versus
STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR. .....Respondents
Through: Mr. Izhar Ahmad, Additional
Public Prosecutor for respondent-
State with SI S.K. Singh
Mr.Shakeel Sarwar, Advocate with
respondent No. 2 in person
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR
ORDER
(ORAL)
CRL.M.A. 31053/2019 (Exemption)
Allowed subject to all just exceptions.
CRL.M.C. 3371/2019
Quashing of FIR No.473/2017 under Sections 420/406/34 of IPC,
registered at Police Station Saket, Delhi is sought on the basis of
Mediated Settlement of 6th June, 2019 and affidavit of 12th July, 2019 of
respondent No. 2 and on the ground that the dispute/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 SI S.K. Singh, on the basis of identity proof produced by him.
Respondent No.2, present in the Court, submits that the dispute
(which is said to be of civil nature) between the parties has been amicably
resolved as today, he has received the settled amount by way of demand
drafts dated 06th June, 2019 drawn on Axis Bank, Sector-45, Gurgaon,
Haryana from petitioners. He affirms the contents of his affidavit of 12th
July, 2019 supporting this petition and submits that the dispute, which led
to registration of the FIR in question, now stands cleared amongst the
parties and now, no grievance against 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 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 dispute, which led to registration of the FIR in question,
now stands settled between the parties.
Accordingly, this petition is allowed subject to costs of ₹50,000/-
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.473/2017 under Sections 420/406/34 of
IPC, registered at Police Station Saket, Delhi and the proceedings
emanating therefrom shall stand quashed qua petitioners.
This petition is accordingly disposed of.
Dasti.
(SUNIL GAUR)
JUDGE
JULY 16, 2019
v
