Pramod Kumar & Ors. Vs.the State & Anr. - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citationsooperkanoon.com/1222789
CourtDelhi High Court
Decided OnApr-24-2019
AppellantPramod Kumar & Ors.
RespondentThe State & Anr.
Excerpt:
* + in the high court of delhi at new delhi date of order: april 24, 2019 crl.m.c. 2130/2019 & crl.m.a. 8534/2019 pramod kumar & ors. .....petitioners through: mr. s. shah, advocate versus the state & anr. .....respondents through: mr. izhar ahmad, additional public prosecutor for state with asi praveen kumar respondent no.2 in person. coram: hon'ble mr. justice sunil gaur order (oral) quashing of fir no.697/2016, under sections 406/498-a/34 of ipc, registered at police station sangam vihar, new delhi is sought on the basis of mediated settlement of 5th september, 2017 (annexure c) 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 asi praveen kumar on the basis of identity proof produced by her. crl.m.c. 2130/2019 page 1 of 3 respondent no.2, present in the court, submits that the dispute between the parties has been amicably resolved vide aforesaid mediated settlement of 5th september, 2017 (annexure c). respondent no.2 affirms the contents of her affidavit of 11th february, 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 scc641has 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. crl.m.c. 2130/2019 page 2 of 3 accordingly, fir no.697/2016, under sections 406/498-a/34 of ipc, registered at police station sangam vihar, new delhi and the proceedings emanating therefrom are hereby quashed qua petitioners. this petition and application are accordingly disposed of. dasti. april24 2019 p’ma (sunil gaur) judge crl.m.c. 2130/2019 page 3 of 3
Judgment:

* + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Order: April 24, 2019 CRL.M.C. 2130/2019 & CRL.M.A. 8534/2019 PRAMOD KUMAR & ORS. .....Petitioners Through: Mr. S. Shah, Advocate Versus THE STATE & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Izhar Ahmad, Additional Public Prosecutor for State with ASI Praveen Kumar Respondent No.2 in person. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR ORDER

(ORAL) Quashing of FIR No.697/2016, under Sections 406/498-A/34 of IPC, registered at Police Station Sangam Vihar, New Delhi is sought on the basis of mediated settlement of 5th September, 2017 (Annexure C) 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 ASI Praveen Kumar on the basis of identity proof produced by her. Crl.M.C. 2130/2019 Page 1 of 3 Respondent No.2, present in the Court, submits that the dispute between the parties has been amicably resolved vide aforesaid mediated settlement of 5th September, 2017 (Annexure C). Respondent No.2 affirms the contents of her affidavit of 11th February, 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 SCC641has 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. Crl.M.C. 2130/2019 Page 2 of 3 Accordingly, FIR No.697/2016, under Sections 406/498-A/34 of IPC, registered at Police Station Sangam Vihar, New Delhi and the proceedings emanating therefrom are hereby quashed qua petitioners. This petition and application are accordingly disposed of. Dasti. APRIL24 2019 p’ma (SUNIL GAUR) JUDGE Crl.M.C. 2130/2019 Page 3 of 3