Hari Om Bhatia & Others vs State Of Nct Delhi And Another
2008 Latest Caselaw 1496 Del

*           IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+                         CRL.M.C.No.2846/2008

%                   Date of Decision: 29.08.2008
Hari Om Bhatia & Others                          .... Petitioners

                       Through Mr.Arun Arora, Advocate.

                                   Versus

State of NCT Delhi and Another                      .... Respondent

                       Through Mr.R.N. Vats, APP for the State.
                               Mr.Sanjeev    Singh,     Advocate  for
                               respondent     No.2       along   with
                               Mr.Anupam Mehndi, Sr. Executive of
                               respondent No.2 company
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR

1.   Whether reporters of Local papers may be              YES
     allowed to see the judgment?
2.   To be referred to the reporter or not?                 NO
3.   Whether the judgment should be reported in             NO
     the Digest?


ANIL KUMAR, J.

*

Crl.M.A. No.10401/2008

Allowed, subject to just exceptions.

The application is allowed.

CRL.M.C.No.2846/2008

This is a petition under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code

seeking quashing of FIR No.245 of 2003 dated 12.03.2003 under

Sections 420/468/471/120B of Indian Penal Code registered at Police

Station Lajpat Nagar.

Issue notice to respondents. Mr.Vats and Mr.Singh accept

notices on behalf of respondent No.1 and respondent No.2 respectively.

Learned counsel for the respondent No.2 states that Mr.Anupam

Mehndi, Sr. Executive of respondent No.2, is present and an affidavit

has been filed in support of the petition seeking quashing of the said

FIR.

Learned counsel for the parties contend that the disputes and

differences pending between the parties have been amicably resolved

and the settlement agreement dated 30th April, 2005 was executed

incorporating the terms of the settlement which has been complied with

under which an amount of Rs.8.00 lakh was payable out of which

Rs.7.91 lakh was paid by banker's cheque and the amount of

Rs.9,000/- was paid in cash in satisfaction of all the claims pertaining

to hire purchase agreement of respondent No.2.

In the circumstances, learned counsel for the parties contend

that no useful purpose shall be served in continuing with the

proceedings pursuant to FIR No.245 of 2003 dated 12.03.2003 under

Sections 420/468/471/120B of Indian Penal Code registered at Police

Station Lajpat Nagar. The representative of respondent No.2 states that

respondent No.2 has reached a settlement without any coercion or

pressure of any type from anyone and he has instructions to state that

the respondent No.2 company does not want to continue the

proceedings pursuant to the above-said FIR.

Considering the facts and circumstances, it is apparent that no

useful purpose shall be served in continuing with the proceedings

pursuant to the FIR No.245 of 2003 dated 12.03.2003 under Sections

420/468/471/120B of Indian Penal Code registered at Police Station

Lajpat Nagar against the petitioners. It shall also be in the interest of

justice in case the above-said FIR and all the proceedings emanating

therefrom against the petitioners are quashed. Learned Additional

Public Prosecutor, Mr.Vats, has also no objection to quashing of the FIR

No.245 of 2003 dated 12.03.2003 under Sections 420/468/471/120B

of Indian Penal Code registered at Police Station Lajpat Nagar against

the petitioners and all the proceedings emanating therefrom.

In the totality of facts and circumstances, FIR No.245 of 2003

dated 12.03.2003 under Sections 420/468/471/120B of Indian Penal

Code registered at Police Station Lajpat Nagar and all the proceedings

emanating therefrom against the petitioners are quashed.

The petition is disposed of.

Dasti.

August 29, 2008                                  ANIL KUMAR, J.
'Dev'