DILDAR SINGH Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Quashing of FIR No. 447/2016, under Section 323/354/506/34 of IPC, registered at Police Station Shakarpur, Delhi is sought on the basis of affidavit of 19th March, 2019 of respondent No. 2 and on the ground that the misunderstanding which led to registration of the FIR in question, now stands cleared between the parties.

(2.) Upon notice, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent-State submits that respondent No.2, present in the Court, is the complainant/first-informant of FIR in question and she has been identified to be so, by Additional Public Prosecutor, on the basis of identity proof produced by her.

(3.) Respondent No. 2, present in the Court, submits that the misunderstanding, which led to registration of the FIR in question, now stands cleared between the parties. Respondent No. 2 affirms the contents of her affidavit of 19th March, 2019 supporting this petition and submits that now, no grievance against petitioners survives and to restore cordiality between the parties, who are related to each other, proceedings arising out of the FIR in question be brought to an end. Supreme Court in Parbatbhai Aahir @ Parbatbhai Bhimsinhbhai v. State of Gujarat (2017) 9 SCC 641 has reiterated the parameters for exercising inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of FIR/criminal complaint, which are as under:-