Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Hira Vs State
Hira Vs State
*
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of Decision: 3rd July, 2015
+
..... Petitioners
Mr. Mukesh Kumar, Advocate
versus
STATE & ANR.
Through:
..... Respondent
Mr. Navin Sharma, Additional
Public Prosecutor for respondentState SI Dinesh
Respondent No.2 in person
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR
JUDGMENT
(ORAL)
by her.
Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for State submits on
instructions that the trial of this FIR case has not yet begun.
Respondent No.2, present in the Court, submits that the dispute
between the parties has been amicably resolved and she is living together
happily with petitioner No.1-husband for last three years. Respondent
No.2 further submits that now the misunderstanding, which led to
registration of the FIR in question, stands cleared amongst the parties and
she affirms the contents of her affidavit of 29th June, 2015 supporting this
petition and submits that now no dispute with petitioners survives and to
restore cordiality between the parties, the proceedings arising out of the
FIR in question be brought to an end.
In Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303, Apex
Court has recognized the need of amicable resolution of disputes in cases
like the instant one, by observing as under:61.In other words, the High Court must consider
whether it would be unfair or contrary to the interest of
justice to continue with the criminal proceedings
or
continuation of criminal proceedings would tantamount to
abuse of process of law despite settlement and compromise
between the victim and the wrongdoer and whether to secure
the ends of justice, it is appropriate that criminal case is put
to an end and if the answer to the above question(s) is in the
affirmative, the High Court shall be well within its jurisdiction
to quash the criminal proceedings.
The aforesaid dictum stands reiterated by the Apex Court in a
recent judgment in Narinder Singh v. State of Punjab (2014) 6 SCC 466.
Crl.M.C.No.2602/2015 Page 2
At this stage, the Court can also be swayed by the fact that the
settlement between the parties is going to result in harmony
between them which may improve their future relationship.
29.7. While deciding whether to exercise its power under
Section 482 of the Code or not, timings of settlement play a
crucial role. Those cases where the settlement is arrived at
immediately after the alleged commission of offence and the
matter is still under investigation, the High Court may be
liberal in accepting the settlement to quash the criminal
proceedings/investigation. It is because of the reason that at
this stage the investigation is still on and even the charge-sheet
has not been filed. Likewise, those cases where the charge is
framed but the evidence is yet to start or the evidence is still at
infancy stage, the High Court can show benevolence in
exercising its powers favourably, but after prima facie
assessment of the circumstances/material mentioned above. On
the other hand, where the prosecution evidence is almost
complete or after the conclusion of the evidence the matter is at
the stage of argument, normally the High Court should refrain
from exercising its power under Section 482 of the Code, as in
such cases the trial court would be in a position to decide the
case finally on merits and to come to a conclusion as to
whether the offence under Section 307 IPC is committed or not.
Similarly, in those cases where the conviction is already
recorded by the trial court and the matter is at the appellate
stage before the High Court, mere compromise between the
parties would not be a ground to accept the same resulting in
acquittal of the offender who has already been convicted by the
trial court. Here charge is proved under Section 307 IPC and
conviction is already recorded of a heinous crime and,
therefore, there is no question of sparing a convict found guilty
of such a crime.
In the facts and circumstances of this case and in view of the fact
Crl.M.C.No.2602/2015 Page 5
(SUNIL GAUR)
JUDGE
JULY 03, 2015
r
Crl.M.C.No.2602/2015 Page 6