Delhi High Court
Kake @ Vikash & Ors vs The State Of N.C.T Of Delhi & Anr on 7 May, 2019
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of Order: May 07, 2019
+ CRL.M.C. 2459/2019
KAKE @ VIKASH & ORS .....Petitioners
Through: Mr. Rahul Mishra, Advocate
versus
THE STATE OF N.C.T OF DELHI & ANR .....Respondents
Through: Mr. M.S.Oberoi, Additional Public
Prosecutor for respondent-State
with SI Rajeev Kumar
Respondent No. 2 in person
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR
ORDER
(ORAL)
CRL.M.A.9748/2019 (Exemption)
Allowed subject to all just exceptions.
CRL.M.C. 2459/2019
Quashing of FIR No.44/2018, under Sections 354(B)/323/509/34
of IPC, registered at police station Harsh Vihar, Delhi is sought on the
basis of affidavit of 3rd May, 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 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 Rajeev Kumar, on the basis of identity proof
produced by her.
Respondent No. 2 present in the Court, affirms the contents of her
affidavit of 3rd May, 2019 and submits that the misunderstanding, which
led to registration of the FIR in question, now stands cleared between the
parties and now, no grievance against petitioners remains and so, to
restore cordiality amongst the parties, who are residing in the same
locality, 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 ₹10,000/-
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.44/2018, under Sections
354(B)/323/509/34 of IPC, registered at police station Harsh Vihar, Delhi
and the proceedings emanating therefrom shall stand quashed qua
petitioners.
This petition is accordingly disposed of.
Dasti.
(SUNIL GAUR)
JUDGE
MAY 07, 2019
v
