Ankit Singh v. State Of NCT Of Delhi & ANR.

$~68 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. 8846/2023 ANKIT SINGH ..... Petitioner Through:

Dr. M.Y. Khan, Advocate with petitioner in person.

versus STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR.

..... Respondents Through:

Mr. Aashneet Singh, APP for State with SI R.N. Ashang and HC Manish, P.S. Cyber, NW, Delhi.

Respondent No.2 in person.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR OHRI

O R D E R

% 05.02.2024 1.

The present proceedings are instituted under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of FIR No. 39/2023 registered under Section 420 IPC at Police Station Cyber Police Station, District North West, Delhi on the ground that the parties have amicably settled their disputes. 2.

As per the allegations levelled in the FIR, respondent No.2's Rupay Credit Card was used in three illegal transactions, causing him loss to the tune of Rs.1,78,000/-.

3.

Mr. Singh, learned APP for the State, on instructions, submits that the petitioner is the only accused person and respondent No.2 is the complainant/victim in the present case.

4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the parties have amicably settled their disputes vide Settlement dated 19.09.2023, a copy of The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

which has been placed on record. As per the settlement, respondent No.2 has already received an amount of Rs.2,10,800/- as full and final settlement, and thus in terms of the said settlement, respondent No.2 is now left with no claim or grievance against the petitioners.

5.

Petitioner, who is present in Court, has been identified by his counsel as well as the I.O./SI R.N. Ashang and HC Manish, P.S. Cyber, NW, Delhi. Respondent No. 2, who is also present in Court, has been identified by the I.O.

6.

The petitioner has shown remorse for his conduct and undertakes not to repeat the same in future. Respondent No. 2 also states that he has settled the disputes with the petitioner out of his own free will, volition and without any coercion. He further states that he has no objection if the present FIR and consequent proceedings are quashed.

7.

The parties shall remain bound by the statements made in Court today.

8.

In Parbatbhai Aahir and Others v. State of Gujarat and Another reported as (2017) 9 SCC 641, it has been held as under:- "16. The broad principles which emerge from the precedents on the subject, may be summarised in the following propositions:

xxx 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 in so far 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;

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

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; and..."

9.

Similarly, in State of Madhya Pradesh v. Laxmi Narayan and Others reported as (2019) 5 SCC 403, it has been held as under:- "15. Considering the law on the point and the other decisions of this Court on the point, referred to hereinabove, it is observed and held as under:

15.1. That the power conferred Under Section 482 of the Code to quash the criminal proceedings for the non-compoundable offences Under Section 320 of the Code can be exercised having overwhelmingly and predominantly the civil character, particularly those arising out of commercial transactions or arising out of matrimonial relationship or family disputes and when the parties have resolved the entire dispute amongst themselves;"

10.

In view of the above facts and considering that no useful purpose will be served in continuance of the proceedings, it is directed that the aforesaid FIR and the consequent proceedings arising therefrom are hereby quashed. 11.

With the above directions, the petition is disposed of. MANOJ KUMAR OHRI, J FEBRUARY 5, 2024 ga The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.