Asghar Ali Khan And Ors. vs State
2010 Latest Caselaw 3908 Del

*           IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+                         WP(Crl) No. 911/2010

                                                  Decided on 20.08.2010

IN THE MATTER OF :

ASGHAR ALI KHAN AND ORS.                              ..... Petitioners
                   Through: Mr. M.T. Malik, Advocate with
                   Mr. Naushad, Advocate with petitioners No.1 to 3 in
                   person.

                    versus

STATE                                                     ..... Respondent
                          Through: Mr. Saleem Ahmed, ASC with
                          Inspector Amrit Raj, PS: Jamia Nagar.

CORAM

* HON'BLE MS.JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI

     1. Whether Reporters of Local papers may           No
        be allowed to see the Judgment?

     2. To be referred to the Reporter or not?          No

     3. Whether the judgment should be                  No
        reported in the Digest?


HIMA KOHLI, J. (Oral)

1. The present petition is filed by the petitioners under Article 226

of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 of the Cr.PC praying inter

alia for quashing of FIR No.16/2007, lodged by petitioner No.1, father of

petitioner No.2 against his son and petitioner No.3, under Sections

420/468/471/120B IPC, registered with Police Station: Jamia Nagar, New

Delhi.

2. It is the case of petitioner No.1 that he was maintaining a saving

bank account with Jamia Cooperative Bank, Batla House, New Delhi for the

past five years and used to deposit the cash in the said account. However,

he lost his two cheque books and upon visiting the Bank, came to know that

a sum of Rs.3,92,992/- had been unauthorizedly withdrawn from his

account. On enquiry by the Bank Manager, it transpired that the son of

petitioner No.1, petitioner No.2 herein had connived with petitioner No.3, to

forge the signatures of petitioner No.1 on the lost/misplaced cheques,

without his knowledge or consent and they had withdrawn the moneys

illegally. After lodging of the FIR, investigations were undertaken by the

police authorities, and the matter is now stated to be at the stage of filing of

charge-sheet. In the meantime, the petitioners have approached this Court

stating that they have arrived at a settlement and that the petitioner No.1

does not wish any further action to be taken on the FIR, lodged by him

against petitioners No.2 and 3.

3. Learned APP for the State submits that the specimen signatures

and the admitted signatures of the complainant/petitioners No.1 and

petitioner No.2 were obtained and have been sent to the FSL for an expert

opinion and further, that the petitioner No.2 was declared a proclaimed

offender in the case on 12.01.2009. He submits that in these circumstances

and having regard to the conduct of petitioner No.2, and that too, directed

against his own father, he should be put to strict terms so that a message is

conveyed to the public at large, that the parties like petitioners No.2 & 3, if

caught indulging in such illegality, shall be dealt with in strict terms.

4. Petitioners No.2 & 3 are identified by the counsel for the

petitioners and the Investigating Officer. On enquiry, petitioner No.2

informs the Court that he is 25 years of age and is working in a BPO,

namely, Wipro, situated in Okhla, Modi Mills, New Delhi. He shall furnish the

full particulars and address of his employer to the learned APP within one

week. As a gesture of repentance and that too in holy month of Ramazan,

he volunteers to make efforts to return in installments, the money

withdrawn by him unauthorizedly from his father's account. He offers to

return a sum of Rs.10,000/- per month to his father.

5. In view of the aforesaid submission made by petitioner No.2, it

is directed that Rs.10,000/- p.m. shall be deducted by his employer from his

salary and directly remitted by ECS to the S/B account No.89544 of

petitioner No.1, maintained with Jamia Cooperative Bank, Batla House

Branch, New Delhi. The said amount shall be continued to be deducted from

the salary of the petitioner No.2 and deposited by his employer in the

account of petitioner No.1, till the entire amount of Rs.3,52,992/- stands

liquidated. In case, petitioner No.2 pays any amount directly to petitioner

No.1, the latter shall issue him a receipt in acknowledge, which shall be

retained by petitioner No.2 as proof of payment. Any default of payment by

petitioner No.2, shall be brought to the notice of the Court by the petitioner

No.1.

6. Further, having regard to the submissions made by learned APP

for the State, it is deemed appropriate to quash FIR No.16/2007 lodged by

the petitioner No.1/complainant with Police Station: Jamia Nagar, and all the

proceedings arising therefrom, subject to the following terms & conditions:

(i) Petitioner No.2 is directed to render social services in the Old

Age Homes, run by a NGO, Help Age India. He shall report to the

Director/Manager of the NGO, within two weeks to undertake duties as

assigned to him for one hour, once a week and continue to render service for

a period of one year. The NGO, Help Age India shall forward a bi-monthly

report of petitioner No.2 to the SHO of the area. In case of any

absenteeism/default on the part of petitioner No.2, the same shall be

conveyed immediately by the NGO/SHO of the area to the learned APP for

the State for bringing the same to the notice of the Court and for seeking

recall of the orders passed today.

(ii) Insofar as, petitioner No.3 is concerned, he shall refund a sum of

Rs.40,000/- to petitioner No.1, taken as 10% commission from petitioner

No.2 for fraudulently presenting the cheques for withdrawal of monies from

the S/B account of petitioner No.1. The said amount shall be re-paid to

petitioner No.1 within two weeks from today, with proof of payment shown

to the learned APP for the State within the same time. Petitioner No.3 shall

also report to the Director, Help Age India, within two weeks, and render

one hour's weekly service for a period of one year as indicated above. Non-

compliance of the order by petitioner No.3 shall be intimated by the NGO/

SHO of the area and the learned APP in a similar manner as applicable to

petitioner No.2.

7. The petition is disposed of. File be consigned to the record room.

A copy of this order be forwarded by the Registry forthwith to

the employer of petitioner No.2 and the NGO mentioned above for perusal

and compliance.

                                                            HIMA KOHLI,J
AUGUST     20, 2010
rkb