* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of Order: July 22, 2019
+ CRL.M.C. 3480/2019 Crl.M.A. 31518/2019
PRAVEEN ORS. ….. Petitioners
Through: Mr. Ajay Kumar Mr. Sanjay
STATE (NCT OF DELHI) ANR. ….. Respondents
Through: Mr. Rajat Katyal, Additional
Public Prosecutor for respondent
No.1-State with ASI Ranvir Singh
Respondent No.2 in person.
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR
Quashing of FIR No. 97/2015, under Sections 498A/Section406/Section34 of IPC,
registered at Police Station Nanakpura, Delhi is sought on the basis of
mediated settlement of 5th September, 2018 and affidavit of 2nd 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 she has been
identified to be so, by ASI Ranvir Singh on the basis of identity proof
produced by her.
Respondent No.2, present in the Court, submits that the dispute
CRL.M.C. 3480/2019 Page 1 of 3
between the parties has been amicably resolved in terms of mediated
settlement of 5th September, 2018 and in terms thereof, today she has
received amount of ₹85,000/- by way of two fixed deposit in the form of
Kisan Vikas Patra, bearing Nos.4294709892 and 4294746538, dated 11 th
February, 2019, drawn on Post Office District Court South West, New
Delhi from petitioners. Respondent No.2 affirms the contents of her
affidavit of 2nd May, 2019 supporting this petition 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
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
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,
CRL.M.C. 3480/2019 Page 2 of 3
therefore, continuance of proceedings arising out of the FIR in question
would be an exercise in futility.
Accordingly, FIR No. 97/2015, under Sections 498A/Section406/Section34 of
IPC, registered at Police Station Nanakpura, Delhi and the proceedings
emanating therefrom are hereby quashed qua petitioners.
This petition and application are accordingly disposed of.
JULY 22, 2019
CRL.M.C. 3480/2019 Page 3 of 3