Sanjiv Dutta vs.govt. Of Nct of Delhi & Anr. - Court Judgment

* + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Order: July 26, 2019 CRL.M.C. 3614/2019 & CRL.M.A. 32036/2019 SANJIV DUTTA ........ Petitioner

Through: Mr. Milan Laskar, Advocate. Versus GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mr. M.P. Singh, Additional Public Prosecutor for State with SI Vikas Kumar Respondent No.2 in person. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR ORDER

(ORAL) Quashing of FIR No.299/2010, under Sections 341/420/467/471 of IPC, registered at Police Station Hari Nagar, Delhi is sought on the basis of affidavit of 22nd July, 2019 of respondent No.2 and on the ground that the misunderstanding which led to registration of the FIR in question, now stands cleared between the parties. At the outset, petitioner’s counsel submits that there is typographical error in the memo of parties and he has handed over the amended memo of parties which is taken on record. Upon notice, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent- State submits that respondent No.2, who is present in Court, is the Crl.M.C. 3614/2019 Page 1 of 3 complainant of FIR in question and she has been identified to be so, by SI Vikas Kumar, on the basis of identity proof produced by her.... RESPONDENTS

No.2, present in the Court submits that the misunderstanding between the parties has been amicably resolved. She affirms the contents of his affidavit of 22nd July, 2019 and submits that there is no forgery angle and the misunderstanding, which led to registration of the FIR in question, now stands cleared between the parties and now, no grievance against petitioner 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.” In the facts and circumstances of this case, I find that there is no forgery angle and the misunderstanding which led to registration of the Crl.M.C. 3614/2019 Page 2 of 3 FIR in question, now stands cleared between the parties, therefore, continuance of proceedings arising out of the FIR in question would be an exercise in futility. Consequentially, 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.299/2010, under Sections 341/420/467/471 of IPC, registered at Police Station Hari Nagar, Delhi and the proceedings emanating therefrom shall stand quashed qua petitioner. This petition and application are accordingly disposed of. Dasti. (SUNIL GAUR) JUDGE JULY26 2019 p’ma Crl.M.C. 3614/2019 Page 3 of 3