Deepak Goyal vs State, Nct Of Delhi & Anr
2019 Latest Caselaw 1562 Del

*     IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
                            Date of Order: March 18, 2019

+     CRL.M.C. 1496/2019 & CRL.M.A. 5920/2019
      DEEPAK GOYAL                                       ..... Petitioner
                         Through:     Mr. Manu Nayar and Ms. Deeksha
                                      Nayyar, Advocates
                         Versus
      STATE, NCT OF DELHI & ANR                          .....Respondents
                         Through:     Mr. Izhar Ahmad, Additional
                                      Public Prosecutor for State with SI
                                      Sanjay Kumar
                                      Mr. Ratna Appnender, Advocate
                                      with Respondent No. 2 in person.

      CORAM:
      HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR
                   ORDER

(ORAL)

Quashing of FIR No. 64/2018, under Sections 354/354D/506/509 of IPC registered at police station Barakhamba Road, New Delhi is sought on the basis of Affidavit of 1st February, 2019 of respondent No. 2 and on the ground that the misunderstanding which led to registration of the FIR, 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 the FIR in question and she has been identified to be so, by SI Sanjay Kumar on the basis of identity proof produced by her. .

Respondent No.2-Nayyera Khan, present in the Court, submits that the misunderstanding between the parties has been amicably resolved and she affirms the contents of aforesaid Affidavit of 1st February, 2019 supporting this petition and submits that now no dispute with 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.

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".

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, now stands cleared between the parties.

Accordingly, this petition is allowed subject to costs of `25,000/- to be deposited by petitioner with Prime Minister's National Relief Fund

within three days from today. Upon placing on record the proof of deposit of costs within two days thereafter and handing over its copy to the Investigating Officer, FIR No.64/2018, under Sections 354/354D/506/509 of IPC registered at police station Barakhamba Road, New Delhi and the proceedings emanating therefrom shall stand quashed.

This petition and the application are accordingly disposed of. Dasti.

(SUNIL GAUR) JUDGE MARCH 18, 2019 p'ma