Delhi High Court
Tarique vs The State & Anr on 26 July, 2019
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of Order: July 26, 2019
+ CRL.M.C. 3606/2019
TARIQUE .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Shree Niwas Sharma,
Advocate with petitioner in person
versus
THE STATE & ANR .....Respondents
Through: Ms. Neelam Sharma, Additional
Public Prosecutor for respondent-
State with Inspector Vinay Kumar
Mr. S.K. Tiwari, Advocate with
respondent No. 2 in person
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR
ORDER
(ORAL)
CRL.M.A. 32019/2019 (Exemption)
Allowed subject to all just exceptions.
CRL.M.C. 3606/2019
Quashing of FIR No.174/2018, under Section 376 of IPC,
registered at Police Station Khajuri Khas, Delhi is sought on the basis of
affidavit of 5th 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 respondents No. 2, who is present in Court, is the
complainant of FIR in question and she has been identified to be so, by
Inspector Vinay Kumar, on the basis of identity proof produced by her.
Respondents No. 2, present in the Court submits that petitioner had
established physical relations with her while promising to marry her and
now petitioner has married her on 1st May, 2018. Copy of the said 'Nikah
Nama' of 1st May, 2018 is placed on record. She affirms the contents of
her affidavit of 5th July, 2019 filed in support of this petition and submits
that 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 the cordiality between the parties,
the proceedings arising out of the FIR in question be brought to an end, as
petitioner has undertaken to keep her happy.
At this stage, petitioner who appears in person undertakes to keep
respondent No. 2 happy under all circumstances. Learned Additional
Public Prosecutor for respondent-State submits that the cancellation
report is being filed in this FIR case.
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, in the face of copy of
the 'Nikah Nama' of 1st May, 2018 and the fact of filing of cancellation
report in this FIR by the Investigating Officer, 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.
Consequentially, FIR No.174/2018, under Section 376 of IPC,
registered at Police Station Khajuri Khas, Delhi and the proceedings
emanating therefrom are hereby quashed with a rider that if respondent
No. 2 has any grievance against petitioner at any point of time, she is at
liberty to get this order revoked.
This petition is accordingly disposed of.
Dasti.
(SUNIL GAUR)
JUDGE
JULY 26, 2019
v
