Delhi High Court
Satender Singh & Ors vs State & Anr on 27 May, 2019
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of Order: May 27, 2019
+ CRL.M.C. 2881/2019
SATENDER SINGH & ORS .....Petitioners
Through: Mr. Anuj Kapoor, Advocate.
Versus
STATE & ANR .....Respondents
Through: Dr. M.P. Singh, Additional Public
Prosecutor with ASI Suresh Kumar
and SI C.B. Sharma.
Ms. Pooja Pandey and Mr. Alok
Motan and Mr. S.C. Motan,
Advocates with respondent No. 2
in person.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR
ORDER
(ORAL)
CRL.M.A.11598/2019 (Exemption)
Allowed subject to all just exceptions.
CRL.M.C. 2881/2019
Quashing of FIR No.205/2017, under Sections 498-A/406/34 of
IPC and under Section 4, Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 of IPC, registered
at Police Station New Usmanpur, Delhi is sought on the basis of affidavit
of 20th May, 2019 of second respondent.
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 they have been
identified to be so, by ASI Suresh Kumar 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 and she affirms the
contents of her aforesaid affidavit of 20th May, 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, this petition is allowed subject to costs of ₹10,000/-
to be deposited by petitioners with Prime Minister's National Relief Fund
within four weeks 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.205/2017, under Sections 498-A/406/34 of
IPC and under Section 4 Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 of IPC, registered
at Police Station New Usmanpur, Delhi and the proceedings emanating
therefrom shall stand quashed qua petitioners.
This petition is accordingly disposed of.
(SUNIL GAUR)
JUDGE
MAY 27, 2019
v
