Vinay Verma & Ors vs State Of Delhi & Anr
2019 Latest Caselaw 3320 Del

*      IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
                               Date of Order: July 19, 2019

+      CRL.M.C. 3466/2019 & CRL.M.As. 31448-31449/2019

       VINAY VERMA & ORS                                .....Petitioners
                   Through:            Mr. Ankit Gupta & Mr. Ajit
                                       Bhardwaj, Advocates.


                          Versus

       STATE OF DELHI & ANR                               .....Respondents
                    Through:           Mr. M.P. Singh, Additional Public
                                       Prosecutor for State with SI
                                       Kaushik Ghosh.
                                       Respondent No. 2 in person.

       CORAM:
       HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR

                          ORDER

(ORAL)

Quashing of FIR No. 275/2017, under Sections 498-A/406/34 of IPC, registered at Police Station Shahdara, Delhi is sought on the basis of Mediation Report of 24th March, 2018 (Annexure P-2) reached between the parties.

Upon notice, learned 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 SI Kaushik Ghosh 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 vide aforesaid Mediation Report of 24th March, 2018 (Annexure P-2) and terms thereof have been fully acted upon and that she is living together happily with petitioner- husband since April, 2018. Respondent No.2 affirms the contents of her affidavit of 16th July, 2019 supporting 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.

Consequentially, this petition is allowed subject to costs of ₹10,000/- to be deposited by petitioners with Prime Minister's National Relief Fund within eight 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. 275/2017, under Sections 498- A/406/34 of IPC, registered at Police Station Shahdara, Delhi and the proceedings emanating therefrom shall stand quashed qua petitioners.

This petition and applications are accordingly disposed of. Dasti.

(SUNIL GAUR) JUDGE JULY 19, 2019 p'ma