The court can exercise its power to quash criminal proceedings based on a settlement agreement, guided by principles laid down by the Supreme Court, to promote amicable resolution of disputes.

Suresh Kait, J.

1. Vide the present petition; petitioner seeks directions thereby quashing of FIR No. 457/98 registered at PS-Shakarpur, New Delhi for the offences punishable under Sections 420/467/468/471 IPC and proceedings emanating thereto against the petitioner.

2. Ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that aforesaid case was registered on the complaint made by husband of respondent No. 2, Late Sh. Mani Ram Aggarwal. He died on 14.09.2009. Thereafter, respondent No. 2 has settled the disputes with the petitioner vide Settlement Agreement dated 10.03.2015 at Mediation Centre, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi and an amount of Rs. 10,00,000/- has been paid by respondent No. 2 to the petitioner towards full and final settlement and nothing due to the respondent No. 2. Thus, respondent No. 2 does not want to pursue the case further against the petitioner and she wants this petition to be disposed of.

3. Respondent No. 2 is personally present in the Court with her counsel. She has been identified by SI Gopal, Investigating Officer. She submits that she has paid the amount to the petitioner as per the Settlement Agreement dated 10.03.2015. Therefore, the present petition may be allowed.

4. On the other hand, ld. APP appearing on behalf of the State submits that since the parties have settled the disputes and respondent No. 2 has come forward to quash the FIR mentioned above, the State has no objection, if the present petition is allowed.

5. Under the circumstances and looking to the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab and Another (2012) 10 SCC 303, wherein the Apex Court has referred to a number of matters for the proposition that even a non-compoundable offence can also be quashed on the ground of a settlement agreement between the offender and the victim, if the circumstances so warrant; by observing as under:

‘58. However, certain offences which overwhelmingly and predominantly bear civil flavour having arisen out of civil, mercantile, commercial, financial, partnership or such like transactions or the offences arising out of matrimony, particularly relating to dowry, etc. or the family dispute, where the wrong is basically to the victim and the offender and the victim have settled all disputes between them amicably, irrespective of the fact that such offences have not been made compoundable, the High Court may within the framework of its inherent power, quash the criminal proceeding or criminal complaint or FIR if it is satisfied that on the face of such settlement, there is hardly any likelihood of the offender being convicted and by not quashing the criminal proceedings, justice shall be casualty and ends of justice shall be defeated.’

6. While recognizing the need of amicable resolution of disputes in cases like the instant one, the aforesaid dictum has been affirmed by the Apex Court in a recent judgment in Narinder Singh & Ors. v. State of Punjab & Anr. 2014 6 SCC 466. The pertinent observations of the Apex Court are as under:-

29. 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:

29.1 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.

29.2. When the parties have reached the settlement and on that basis petition for quashing the