Rani Sikka & Ors vs State Of Nct Of Delhi & Anr
2019 Latest Caselaw 3549 Del

*     IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

                                             Date of Order: July 31, 2019

+     CRL.M.C. 3695/2019

      RANI SIKKA & ORS                                   .....Petitioners
                    Through:            Mr. Anil Hooda and Mr. Arya
                                        Sharma, Advocates

                         versus

      STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR                .....Respondents
                    Through: Mr. M.S.Oberoi, Additional Public
                              Prosecutor for respondent-State
                              with SI Avinesh Kumar
                              Mr. Vikas Sharma, Advocate with
                              respondent No. 2 in person

      CORAM:
      HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR
                   ORDER

(ORAL) CRL.M.A. 32371/2019 (Exemption) Allowed subject to all just exceptions.

CRL.M.C. 3695/2019 Quashing of FIR No. 1025/2014 under Sections 354/509/323/34 of IPC, registered at Police Station Hauz Khas, Delhi is sought on the basis of affidavit of 26th 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 among 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 Avinesh Kumar, on the basis of identity proof produced by her.

Respondent No. 2 present in the Court, affirms the contents of her affidavit of 26th July, 2019 and submits that the misunderstanding, which led to registration of the FIR in question, now stands cleared among the parties and now, no grievance against petitioners survives and so, to restore cordiality between the parties, who are from one family, 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 ₹30,000/- 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. 1025/2014 under Sections 354/509/323/34 of IPC, registered at Police Station Hauz Khas, Delhi and the proceedings emanating therefrom shall stand quashed qua petitioners.

This petition is accordingly disposed of. Dasti.

(SUNIL GAUR) JUDGE JULY 31, 2019 v