Anurag Sharma v. State & ORS

$~2 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ CRL.M.C. 1469/2017 ANURAG SHARMA ..... Petitioner Through Ms. Suman Chauhan, Advocate with petitioner in person versus STATE & ORS ..... Respondents Through Ms.Aashaa Tiwari, Addl. PP for State with SI Rajendra Prasad, MACT Cell/NE & SI Shri Gopal, P.S.Shakar Pur Mr.Manendra Pal Gupta, Adv. for complainant

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A. K. CHAWLA

O R D E R

% 23.05.2017 By the petition filed under Section 482 Cr.PC, FIR No. 1947/2014 under Sections 509/506 IPC and 66 A of IT Act, 2000 P.S.Shakar Pur is sought to be quashed. IO identifies the parties present before the Court.

Subject FIR is the out-come of a matrimonial dispute between the complainant-respondent no.2 and the petitioner. Both of them have arrived at a compromise/settlement and in pursuance thereof, the first motion for divorce under Section 13 (b) (i) of the Hindu Marriage Act, is said to have already been granted. Copy of the compromise deed is annexed as Annexure 'B', which both the parties reaffirm before this Court. Incidentally, it may be noted that in the instant case, child of the parties is with the petitioner-husband and the

complainant-respondent No.2, who is the mother of the child, is paying a sum of Rs.12 lacs for the welfare of the child as per the terms and conditions of the compromise. As said earlier, the off-shoot of the subject matter of the FIR in question is the out-come of a matrimonial dispute, which is of a private nature. It is jointly stated that though the challan has since been filed but the matter is yet to be taken up for consideration on charge. Assuming, the charges come to be framed, with the compromise/settlement arrived at, it is highly improbable that the trial would bear any fruits and the entire exercise in all likelihood would be futile.

In Criminal Appeal No. 686/2014 titled Narinder Singh & Ors. vs. State of Punjab & Anr., decided on 27th March, 2014, Hon'ble Supreme Court set down the principles for exercise of power under Section 482 Cr.P.C., in the following words : "31. In view of the aforesaid discussion, we sum up and lay down the following principles by which the High Court would be guided in giving adequate treatment to the settlement between the parties and exercising its power under Section 482 of the Code while accepting the settlement and quashing the proceedings or refusing to accept the settlement with direction to continue with the criminal proceedings:

(I) Power conferred under Section 482 of the Code is to be distinguished from the power which lies in the Court to compound the offences under Section 320 of the Code. No doubt, under Section 482 of the Code, the High Court has inherent power to quash the criminal proceedings even in those cases which are not compoundable, where the parties have settled the matter between themselves. However, this power is to be exercised sparingly and with caution.

(II)When the parties have reached the settlement and on that basis petition for quashing the criminal proceedings is filed,

the guiding factor in such cases would be to secure: (i) ends of justice, or (ii) to prevent abuse of the process of any Court. While exercising the power the High Court is to form an opinion on either of the aforesaid two objectives. (III) Such a power is not be exercised in those prosecutions which involve heinous and serious offences of mental depravity or offences like murder, rape, dacoity, etc. Such offences are not private in nature and have a serious impact on society. Similarly, for offences alleged to have been committed under special statute like the Prevention of Corruption Act or the offences committed by Public Servants while working in that capacity are not to be quashed merely on the basis of compromise between the victim and the offender.

(IV) On the other, those criminal cases having overwhelmingly and pre-dominantly civil character, particularly those arising out of commercial transactions or arising out of matrimonial relationship or family disputes should be quashed when the parties have resolved their entire disputes among themselves. (V) While exercising its powers, the High Court is to examine as to whether the possibility of conviction is remote and bleak and continuation of criminal cases would put the accused to great oppression and prejudice and extreme injustice would be caused to him by not quashing the criminal cases. .........................................................................................................."

Keeping in view the ratio of the judgment (supra) and totality of the facts and circumstances, I am satisfied that ends of justice would be met with, if, the subject FIR No. 1947/2014 under Sections 509/506 IPC and 66A of IT Act, 2000, P.S.Shakar Pur, is quashed alongwith the consequential proceedings emanating therefrom. It is Ordered accordingly. Petition stands disposed off. A. K.