Delhi High Court
Nageshwar Pandey & Ors. vs The State on 9 September, 2010
Author: S.L.Bhayana
HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
W.P (Crl.) No. 919/2009
Reserved on: 11.08.2010
Date of Decision: 09.09.2010
NAGESHWAR PANDEY & ORS. ... PETITIONERS
Through: Mr. Anup Kumar Sinha, Adv. for P-1.
Mr. K.T.S. Tulsi, Sr. Adv. with Mr. V.K.
Mehra, Adv. for P- 2 to 5.
versus
THE STATE ... RESPONDENT
Through: Mr. Saleem Ahmed, ASC for the State
with IO/Inspector Keshav Mathur, SIT/Crime
Branch.
Mr. Sushail Dutt with Mr. Azhar Alam and Mr.
Vikram Singh, Advs. for Anirva Developers Pvt.
Ltd./applicant.
Mr. Pawan Narang, Adv. for Mr. Baleswar
Sharma.
Mr. Vijay Aggarwal, Adv. for Mr. Ravi Arora,
Director
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.L. BHAYANA
1. Whether reporters of local paper may be allowed to
see the judgment? Yes
2. To be referred to the reporter or not? Yes
3. Whether the judgment should be referred in the
Digest? Yes
S.L. BHAYANA,J
This petition has been moved by the petitioners under Section
482 Cr.P.C for quashing of FIR No. 131/2008 u/s 406/420/409/120B
IPC of EOW, Distt. C & R, New Delhi.
2. It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that
petitioner no.1 is the Ex-Director of applicant company and
petitioner nos. 2 to 5 are the accused persons, who have settled the
matter with each other amicably and now they want that the FIR
No.131/2008 be quashed. However, learned counsel for the
applicant, M/s Anirva Developers Pvt. Ltd. submits that petitioner
no.1, Nageshwar Pandey no more the complainant in this case and
that they are the affected parties, who have purchased the land in
question. In view of this, an application bearing no. Crl.
M.A.9226/2009 has been moved by the applicant, M/s Anirva
Developers Pvt. Ltd. under Section 482 Cr.P.C for impleadment to
pursue the present writ petition.
3. Arguments heard.
4. I have gone through the records. I find that the accused
persons namely Ravindra C.P. Navelkar, Yashpal Raikar, Smt.
Fermeena Khaunte and Pradeep Khaunte had filed the bail
application before this court bearing Bail Appl. Nos. 314/2009 &
315/2009. During the hearing of the said bail applications, the
following orders were passed:
" 1. Petitioners are seeking bail in FIR No. 131/2008,
under Sections 406/420/409/120-B of the IPC,
registered at Police Station Economic Offence Wing
with Crime and Railways, New Delhi.
2. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner states
that on the strength of an order of Mumbai High Court,
petitioners were entitled to sell the land in question
and the possession of the same was handed over to the
complainant/first-informant on 22nd January, 2009, and
that petitioners are in custody since 9th January, 2009.
3. Notice.
4. Mr. R.N. Vats, learned Additional Public Prosecutor
accepts notice on behalf of the State and seeks time to
file status report.
5. At this stage, learned Senior Counsel for the
petitioners states that this matter can be resolved
through the medium of Delhi High Court Conciliation
and Mediation Centre. Learned Counsel for the
complainant/first-informant states that he is also willing
to go to the medium of Delhi High Court Conciliation
and Mediation Centre for amicable settlement of the
dispute, which is the subject matter of the FIR in
question.
6. It is agreed upon by both the sides that for this
purpose, the petitioner be granted interim bail as in
interim measure to enable them to settle the dispute in
question.
7. Without commenting on the merits of the case,
the petitioners Yashpal Raikar, Ravindra C.P. Navelkar,
Farmeena Khaunte and Pradeep J. Khaunte, are
admitted to bail on their furnishing bail bond in the sum
of Rupees fifty thousand each with one surety of the
like amount, to the satisfaction of the concerned court.
8. Let both sides appear before the High Court
Conciliation and Mediation Centre on 25th February,
2009 at 3.00 PM and thereafter, if required.
9. List this matter for hearing on 24th March, 2009.
10. Copy of this order be given dasti and sent to the
trial court for compliance.
Thereafter, on 26.2.2009 the following order was passed by
this Court:
"Heard.
Allowed.
Presence of Mr. Suhail Dutt with Mr. Vikas Tiwari
for M/s Anirva Developers Pvt. Ltd. and of Sh. K.T.S.
Tulsi, Senior Counsel for the petitioners be
incorporated in the order of 17th February, 2009.
It goes without saying that M/s Anirva Developers
Pvt. Ltd. would participate in the conciliation
proceedings before Delhi High Court conciliation and
Mediation Centre. "
Consequently, on 24.3.2009, the following order was passed
by this Court:
" Petitioners " Petitioners are seeking bail in FIR
No. 131/2008, under Sections 406/420/409/120B of
the IPC, registered at police station Economic
Offence Wing with Crime and Railways, New Delhi.
Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners state
that this matter stand settled with M/s Anirva
Developers Pvt. Ltd. before the Delhi High Court
Mediation and Conciliation Centre.
Notice be issued to the aforesaid Forum for giving
a report in this matter.
Mr. R.N. Vats, learned Additional Public
Prosecutor for the State submits that the petitioners
have not joined the investigation of this case.
Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners state
that the petitioners are ready to join the
investigation and are ready to appear before
Inspector Ramesh Chander, Investigating Officer of
this case, on 25th March, 2009 at 4.00 PM and
thereafter, as and when required. "
5. I have also gone through the Agreement of Settlement, which
is exhibited 'Ex. PX' (page 96 of Bail Appl. No. 314/2009), wherein
petitioner no.2, Sh. Ravindra Charadchandra Porob Navelkar is the
First Party and the applicant M/s Anirva Developers Pvt. Ltd. and M/s
Aruna Infracon Pvt. Ltd. are the Second and Third Parties
respectively. On perusal of Agreement of Settlement 'Ex.PX', it is
clear that the settlement had taken place between the petitioners
and the applicant and the cheque of Rs.35 crores was also issued to
the applicant (second party) by petitioner no.2 (first party).
6. It will not be out of place to mention that Ravindra C.P.
Navelkar and Yashpal Raikar had filed the writ petition bearing no.
1373/2008 before this Court, in which the State was respondent
no.1 and respondent no. 2 was M/s Anirva Developers Pvt. Ltd.
(applicant herein). This petition has been filed by the petitioners
under Section 482 Cr.P.C, wherein it is categorically mentioned that
the petitioners have settled all the disputes with respondent no.2,
Anirva Developers Pvt. Ltd. and have given cheques of Rs.35 crores
to respondent no.2 and therefore they prayed for quashing of FIR
No. 131/2008 filed against them.
7. On considering the aforementioned facts and circumstances,
it has become clear that petitioner no.1, Nageshwar Pandey is not
the complainant in this case and in fact, the affected party is the
applicant, M/s Anirva Developers Pvt. Ltd. with whom the accused
persons have entered into a settlement before the Delhi High
Court Mediation and Conciliation Centre.
8. It is further noted that the accused petitioner nos. 2 to 5 had
given cheques of Rs.35 crores to M/s Anirva Developers Pvt. Ltd.
towards full and final settlement of all the claims, but the same
were dishonoured. Consequently, M/s Anirva Developers Pvt. Ltd.
moved applications for cancellation of interim bail of petitioner
nos. 2 to 5, which was granted by this Court. So, the claim of
petitioner no.1 that he is the actual person, who is the
complainant in this case, has no basis and there is no ground for
quashing of FIR No. 131/2008 of EOW, Distt. C & R, New Delhi is
made out. In fact, petitioner no.1, Nageshwar Pandey is not the
complainant in this case but rather M/s Anirva Developers Pvt. Ltd.
who are the affected parties, have entered into the shoes of
compliant and they have got the right to pursue the matter.
9. In view of this, I find no merit in the writ petition. The same
is accordingly dismissed.
S.L.BHAYANA,J
SEPTEMBER 09, 2010
KA
