Delhi High Court
Abid Ali & Ors. vs State & Ors. on 17 October, 2011
Author: Suresh Kait
$~22
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CRL.M.C.No.3440/2011
% Judgment delivered on:17th October, 2011
ABID ALI & ORS. ..... Petitioners
Through : Mr. M. Alam, Adv.
versus
STATE & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through: Ms.Rajdipa Behura, APP for
State/R-1.
Mr. Yogesh Chhabra, Adv for R-2.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT
1. Whether the Reporters of local papers
may be allowed to see the judgment? NO
2. To be referred to Reporter or not? NO
3. Whether the judgment should be reported NO
in the Digest?
SURESH KAIT, J. (Oral)
Crl.M.A.No.12220/2011 (exemption)
Exemption is allowed subject to just exceptions.
Criminal M.A. stands disposed of.
CRL.M.C.No.3440/2011
1. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that vide
FIR No.164/2010 dated 05.10.2010 case under Section
420/468/471/120B/34 Indian Penal Code, 1860 has been
registered against the petitioners on the complaint of
respondent No.2 at police station Welcome, New Delhi.
2. Further submits that respondent No.2 has amicably
settled the all the issues qua the aforesaid FIR with the
petitioners pursuant to the compromise dated 18.04.2011
and received the amount of `25.00 lacs from petitioners.
Therefore, he does not wish to pursue present case any
further.
3. Respondent No.2 present in person with his learned
counsel Mr.Yogesh Chhabra, Advocate, who has duly
identified him as respondent No.2.
4. On instructions, learned counsel for respondent No.2
submits that respondent No.2 has settled all the issues qua
aforesaid FIR and he does not wish to pursue present case
against the petitioners.
5. Further respondent No.2 submits that he has no
objection, if the present FIR is quashed.
6. Ms.Rajdipa Behura, learned APP for State strongly
opposed the petition and submits that in light of decision of
Hon'ble Supreme Court in Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab
& Anr. in SLP (Crl.) No.8989/2010 wherein the Division
Bench of the Supreme Court has referred three earlier
decisions viz, B.S. Joshi V. State of Haryana (2003) 4
SCC 675, Nikhil Merchant v. Central Bureau of
Investigation & Anr. (2008) 9 SCC 677 & Manoj
Sharma Vs. State & Ors. (2008) 16 SCC 1 to the larger
Bench for re-consideration whether the abovesaid three
decisions were decided correctly or not. Therefore, she has
prayed that till the outcome of the larger Bench of the Apex
Court, present petition may be adjourned sine-die.
Alternatively, she prayed that in the event, the FIR is
quashed, heavy costs should be imposed upon the
petitioners as the State machinery has been used.
7. I find force in the submission of learned APP, however,
keeping in view the decision of Division Bench of Bombay
High Court, in Nari Motiram Hira Vs. Avinash
Balkrishnan & Anr. in Crl.W.P.No.995/2010 decided on
03.02.2011 has permitted for compounding of the offences
of 'non-compoundable' category as per Section 320 Cr. P.C.
even after discussing Gian Singh (supra).
8. I have also taken similar view in a number of cases as
the view already taken by the Division Bench of Bombay
High Court that till above referred three decisions, are set
aside or altered, by the larger Bench of the Supreme Court,
all the above three decision hold the field and are the
binding precedents.
9. In the circumstances, in view of above, FIR
No.164/2010 under Section 420/468/471/120B/34 Indian
Penal Code, 1860 registered against the petitioners on the
complaint of respondent No.2 at police station Welcome,
New Delhi and proceedings emanating thereto are hereby
quashed.
10. Further, I find force in the submission of learned APP for
State. Since the government machinery has been used and
precious time of the court has been consumed. Therefore,
for substantial justice, costs should be imposed upon the
petitioners.
11. Petitioners have paid a sum of `25.00 lacs to the
respondent No.2, as per settlement dated 18.04.2011. Both
are doing business in Thailand.
12. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioners, on
instructions submits that petitioners are intending to donate
some amount for the welfare purposes.
13. This Court place on record the appreciation on this
gesture advanced by petitioners. Therefore, I direct the
petitioners shall pay a sum of `1.00 lac each.
14. Further direct that total sum of `2.00 lacs shall be
deposited in favour of Principal/Headmaster, Government
Lady Noyee School for Deaf and Dumb, Behind Firozshah
Stadium, Delhi Gate, Delhi within two weeks from today and
proof thereof shall be placed on the record by petitioners.
15. The amount as donated by the petitioner shall be kept
in FDR. The interest accrued thereon shall be utilised for the
well being of needy children of the school.
16. Accordingly, Criminal M.C.No.3440/2011 is allowed and
disposed of in above terms.
17. Dasti.
SURESH KAIT, J
October 17th 2011/Mk
