Mizul Singh vs State & Anr

Sunil Gaur, J

Quashing of FIR No. 83/2013, under Sections 498A/406/ 343/506/34 of IPC, registered at Police Station Vikas Puri, New Delhi is sought on the basis

of affidavit of 15th July, 2019 of second respondent.

Petitioners’ counsel has handed over certified copy of the joint statement of parties recorded on 15th July, 2019 by the matrimonial court wherein

terms of settlement have been recorded.

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 SI Naveen Kumar on the basis of identity proof produced by

her.

Respondent No.2, present in the Court, submits that the dispute between the parties has been amicably resolved in terms of settlement recorded in the

joint statement of parties on 15th July, 2019. Respondent No.2 affirms the contents of her affidavit of 15th July, 2019 supporting this petition and

submits that now no dispute with 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 SCC 64 1has 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 prejudiceâ€​.

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.

Accordingly, FIR No. 83/2013, under Sections 498A/406/ 343/506/34 of IPC, registered at Police Station Vikas Puri, New Delhi and the proceedings

emanating therefrom are hereby quashed qua petitioner.

This petition and applications are accordingly disposed of.