Pravez & Anr vs State (Gnct Of Delhi) & Anr
2019 Latest Caselaw 1378 Del

*      IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
                                           Date of Order: March 07, 2019
+      CRL.M.C. 1262/2019
       PRAVEZ & ANR                                     .....Petitioners
                          Through:     Mr. Piyush Chhabra, Mr. Priyankar
                                       Tiwary and Mr. Saurabh Mishra,
                                       Advocates
                          versus

       STATE (GNCT OF DELHI) & ANR                .....Respondents
                     Through: Mr. Izhar Ahmad, Additional
                               Public Prosecutor for respondent-
                               State with SI Prabhakaran
                               Respondent No. 2 in person

       CORAM:
       HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR

                          ORDER

(ORAL) CRL.M.A. 4955/2019 (Exemption) Allowed subject to all just exceptions.

CRL.M.C. 1262/2019 Quashing of FIR No. 17/2013, under Sections 498-A/406/34 of IPC, registered at police station Dabri, Delhi is sought on the basis of Memorandum of Understanding of 15th December, 2018 reached between the parties.

Mr. Izhar Ahmad, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent-State accepts notice.

Respondent No.2, present in the Court, submits that the dispute between the parties has been amicably resolved, as today she has received

an amount of ₹1,25,000/-by way of demand draft bearing No. 110225, dated 29th January, 2019 drawn on Corporation Bank, Kabir Nagar, Shadra, New Delhi from petitioners. She affirms the contents of her affidavit of 29th January, 2019 filed in support of 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.

Accordingly, FIR No. 17/2013, under Sections 498-A/406/34 of IPC, registered at police station Dabri, Delhi and the proceedings emanating therefrom are hereby quashed.

This petition is accordingly disposed of. Dasti.

(SUNIL GAUR) JUDGE MARCH 07, 2019 v