$~19
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CRL.M.C. 4725/2024 & CRL. MA 17642/2024
ROHTAS ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Raj Mani Mishra, Mr Harsh, Mr.
Shiv Kumar and Mr. Shivam Singh,
Advocates with petitioner in person.
versus
STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Aashneet Singh, APP for State
with SI Paramjit Singh PS Ranhola,
Delhi.
Respondent No.2 through VC.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR OHRI
O R D E R
% 31.05.2024
1. The present proceedings are instituted under Section 482 Cr.P.C. on
behalf of the petitioner seeking quashing of FIR No. 559/2019 registered
under Sections 420/467/468/471/120B IPC at Police Station Ranhola, Delhi
on the ground that the parties have amicably settled their disputes.
2. The allegations in the present FIR are that the petitioner cheated the
complainant by attempting to sell the property that belonged to someone
else.
3. Mr. Aashneet Singh, learned APP for the State, on instructions,
submits that the petitioner is the only accused and respondent No.2 is the
complainant/victim in the present case.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the present FIR has
been registered due to some misunderstanding. He further submits that
parties have amicably settled their disputes vide MoU dated 06.05.2023, a
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 03/06/2024 at 11:42:51
copy of which has been placed on record. In terms of the said settlement,
complainant/respondent No.2 is now left with no claim or grievance against
the petitioner.
5. Petitioner who is present in Court, have been identified by his counsel
as well as the I.O./ SI Paramjit Singh PS Ranhola, Delhi.
6. Respondent No.2 has joined the proceedings through VC and is
identified by the IO. The IO had a telephonic conversation with respondent
no. 2, who stated that he has no objection to the quashing of the instant FIR.
7. The Petitioner has shown remorse for his conduct and undertakes not
to repeat the same in future. Respondent Nos. 2 states that he entered into
the aforementioned MOU out of his own free will, volition and without any
coercion and further states that he has no objection if the present FIR and
consequent proceedings are quashed.
8. The parties shall remain bound by the statements made in Court
today.
9. In ParbatbhaiAahir and Others v. State of Gujarat and
Anotherreported 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;
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 03/06/2024 at 11:42:51
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;
and…”
10. 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;”
11. 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
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 03/06/2024 at 11:42:51
FIR and the consequent proceedings arising therefrom are hereby quashed,
subject to payment of cost of Rs.25,000/- to be deposited by the petitioner
with the Delhi State Legal Services Authority(Account
No.18580110053263, UCO Bank, Branch Rouse Avenue, IFSC:
UCBA0003364) within a period of two weeks from today. The amount so
deposited shall be utilized by the Delhi State Legal Services Authority for
providing counselling/psychological support to POCSO victims requiring
such assistance.
12. Proof evidencing receipt of deposit shall be filed with the I.O. as well
as in Court.
13. A copy of this order be communicated to the Member Secretary,
Delhi State Legal Services Authority for intimation.
14. With the above directions, the petition is disposed of alongwith
miscellaneous application.
15. In case the proof of cost is not filed within two weeks, the IO shall be
at liberty to move an appropriate application in this regard.
MANOJ KUMAR OHRI, J
MAY 31, 2024/
rd
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 03/06/2024 at 11:42:51