Chander Mohan Manaktala v. The State & ANR
$~38 *
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CRL.M.C. 2074/2017 CHANDER MOHAN MANAKTALA ..... Petitioner Through Petitioner in person with Mr. Umesh Singh and Mr. Neeraj Singh, Advs.
versus THE STATE & ANR ..... Respondents Through Mr. Ashok Kumar Garg, Addl. PP for State with SI Rajender Singh, PS Malviya Nagar.
Ms. Mithu Jain, Mr. Sunil Fernandes and Mr. Arnav, Advs. for respondent no.2/BSES
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A. K. CHAWLA
O R D E R
% 22.05.2017 CRL. M.A. 8519/2017 (exemption) Exemption allowed, subject to just exceptions. Application stands disposed of.
CRL.M.C. 2074/2017 By the petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. FIR no. 2331 dated 31.12.2015 under Section 135 of Electricity Act is sought to be quashed on the basis of a compromise/settlement arrived at. Heard.
During the course of hearing, ld. Counsel for the
respondent no.2 states that the petitioner has made payment of the compromise/settlement amount and that, the respondent no.2 has no objection, if, the subject FIR is quashed. Mr. Ashok Kumar Garg, Addl. PP equally states that he has no objection for the subject FIR being quashed.
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 of the considered view that ends of justice would be met with, if, the subject FIR no.2331 dated 31.12.2015, PS Malviya Nagar, is quashed alongwith the consequential proceedings emanating therefrom.
It is Ordered accordingly. Petition stands disposed off.
A. K. CHAWLA, J MAY 22, 2017/rc