Rohtash & Ors. vs State & Anr.
2019 Latest Caselaw 2511 Del

*      IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
                               Date of Order: May 14, 2019

+      CRL.M.C. 2585/2019 & CRL.M.A. 10363/2019
       ROHTASH & ORS.                                     .....Petitioners
                          Through:     Mr. R.K. Gupta, Advocate.


                          Versus
       STATE & ANR.                                       .....Respondents
                          Through:     Mr. M.P. Singh, Additional Public
                                       Prosecutor for State with SI Raju
                                       Yadav.
                                       Mr. B.K. Sharma, Advocate with
                                       Respondent No. 2 in person.
       CORAM:
       HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR

                          ORDER

(ORAL) Quashing of FIR No. 223/2014, under Sections 498-A/406/34 of IPC, registered at Police Station Sultan Puri, Delhi is sought on the basis of settlement of 6th October, 2017 reached between the parties.

Upon notice, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent No.1-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 Raju Yadav on the basis of identity proof produced by her.

Respondent No.2, present in the Court, submits that the dispute between the parties has been amicably resolved vide aforesaid settlement

of 6th October, 2017 and terms thereof have been fully acted upon and that she is living together happily with petitioner-husband from the last three- four years. She affirms the contents of her affidavit of 25th March, 2019 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 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."

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. 223/2014, under Sections 498-A/406/34 of IPC, registered at Police Station Sultan Puri, Delhi and the proceedings

emanating therefrom are hereby quashed qua petitioners. However, it is made clear that if the marriage of respondent No.2 with petitioner- husband again runs into rough weather, then this order will not stand in her way to have recourse to law.

This petition and application are accordingly disposed of. Dasti.

(SUNIL GAUR) JUDGE MAY 14, 2019 p'ma