Delhi High Court
Rakesh Dhingra vs The State Through: Govt Of Nct Of ... on 30 May, 2019
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of Order: May 30, 2019
+ CRL.M.C. 2756/2019 & CRL.M.A. 11056/2019
RAKESH DHINGRA ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. B.P. Sharma & Mr. Ashish
Gill, Advocates.
Versus
THE STATE THROUGH: GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR
.....Respondents
Through: Mr. M.P. Singh, Additional Public
Prosecutor for State with SI Sunny.
Mr. Shanto Mukherjee, Advocate
with Respondent No. 2 in person.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR
ORDER
(ORAL)
Quashing of FIR No. 220/2015, under Sections
420/468/471/120B of IPC, registered at Police Station Roop
Nagar, North District, Delhi is sought on the basis of
„Memorandum of Settlement‟ (Annexure P-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
he has been identified to be so, by SI Sunny, on the basis of
identity proof produced by him. Learned Additional Public
Prosecutor for respondent-State submits that charge-sheet in this
FIR case has been filed for the offence under Section 420 &
120B of IPC only.
Respondent No. 2 present in the Court, submits that the
misunderstanding between the parties has been amicably
resolved vide aforesaid „Memorandum of Settlement‟ (Annexure
P-2) and terms thereof have been fully acted upon. Respondent
No. 2 has handed over his affidavit of 30th May, 2019 in court
today and the same is taken on record. Respondent No. 2 affirms
the contents of his affidavit of 30th May, 2019 and submits that
the misunderstanding with petitioner now stands cleared 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
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 view of the Memorandum of Settlement (Annexure P-2)
and the fact that the charge-sheet has been filed for the offence
under Section 420 & 120B of IPC, 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 petitioner 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.
220/2015, under Sections 420/468/471/120B of IPC, registered
at Police Station Roop Nagar, North District, Delhi and the
proceedings emanating therefrom shall stand quashed qua
petitioner.
This petition and application are accordingly disposed of.
Dasti.
(SUNIL GAUR)
JUDGE
MAY 30, 2019
p‟ma
