* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of Order: July 16, 2019
+ CRL.M.C. 3361/2019 Crl.M.A. 31027/2019
VIKASH ORS. ….. Petitioners
Through: Mr. Ghanshyam, Mr. Salim Babu
Mr. S.K. Kaushik, Advocates.
Versus
STATE ANR. ….. Respondents
Through: Ms. Neelam Sharma, Additional
Public Prosecutor for respondent
No.1-State with SI Amolak
Respondent No.2 in person.
CORAM:
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR
ORDER
(ORAL)
Quashing of FIR No.113/2014, under Sections 498A/Section406/Section34 of
IPC, registered at Police Station Swaroop Nagar, Delhi is sought on the
basis of mediated settlement of 19th March, 2018 and affidavit of 3rd July,
2019 of respondent No.2/complainant.
Upon notice, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent-
State submits that respondent No. 2, present in Court, is the complainant
of FIR in question and she has been identified to be so, by SI Amolak, on
the basis of identity proof produced by her.
Respondent No. 2, present in the Court, submits that mediated
Crl.M.C. 3361/2019 Page 1 of 3
settlement of 19th March, 2018 has been fully acted upon, as today she
has received the balance settled amount of ₹10,000/- in cash from
petitioners. She affirms the contents of her affidavit of 3rd July, 2019 and
submits that 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, I find that
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
Crl.M.C. 3361/2019 Page 2 of 3
within two 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.113/2014, under Sections 498A/Section406/Section34 of
IPC, registered at Police Station Swaroop Nagar, Delhi and the
proceedings emanating therefrom shall stand quashed qua petitioners.
This petition and application are accordingly disposed of.
Dasti.
(SUNIL GAUR)
JUDGE
JULY 16, 2019
r
Crl.M.C. 3361/2019 Page 3 of 3
