Yash Gupta vs State & Ors
2012 Latest Caselaw 105 Del

$-6
*   IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+                       CRL.M.C. 27/2012

%                 Judgment delivered on: 5th January, 2012

        YASH GUPTA                                      ..... Petitioner
                              Through : Mr.Siddharth Luthra, Sr. Adv.
                              With Mr. Ajay Bhargava, Mr. Rajat Navet
                              and Mr. Rajiv Bhatnagar, Advs.

                        Versus.

        STATE & ORS                                   ..... Respondent
                              Through : Mr.Navin Sharma, APP for State.
                              SI Arun Kumar, PS-EOW.
                              Mr.Rajinder Singh and Ms.Priyamvada
                              Shenoy, Advs. for respondent no. 2.

CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT

SURESH KAIT, J. (Oral)

Crl. M.A. 89/12 Exemption is allowed subject to just exceptions. Criminal M.A. stands disposed of.

+       Crl. M.C. 27/2012

1.      Notice issued.

2. Ld. APP accepts notice on behalf of the State.

3. Mr. Rajinder Singh, Adv. accepts notice on behalf of respondent no.2.

4. Ld. Counsel for the petitioner submits that vide FIR no.142 dated 04.08.2011 case under Section 406/420/471 Indian Penal Code, 1860 was registered against the petitioner on the complaint of respondent no. 2 at PS-EOW.

5. Ld. Counsel for the petitioner and respondent no. 2 have jointly stated that vide settlement agreement dated 22.12.2011, parties have amicably resolved all the disputes qua the aforesaid FIR and respondent no. 2 is no more interested to pursue the case. Therefore, if the instant FIR is quashed he has no objection.

6. Respondent no. 2 has filed resolution dated 14.01.2011, whereby Mr. Saurabh Narain has been authorized to take all steps for settling any proceedings filed by or against Virtuous Retail Limited with respect to Sugam Vanijya Holdings Private Limited by taking all steps including executing any consent terms and / or withdrawing any petition, application, suit, appeal or such other legal, local or judicial proceedings that may been filed. I note Mr. Saurabh Narain has also filed his affidavit to the effect that respondent no. 2 and petitioner have entered into settlement and executed a settlement agreement dated 22.12.2011.

7. Ld. APP on the other hand submits that the instant case is pending for investigation and challan has not been filed.

8. Ld. APP further submits that Section 406 and 471 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 are not compoundable and relied upon the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Gian Singh v. 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 v. State & Ors. (2008) 16 SCC 1 to the larger Bench for re-consideration whether the abovesaid three decisions were decided correctly or not. Therefore, he has prayed that till the matter is decided by the larger Bench of the Apex Court, instant petition may be adjourned sine-die. Alternatively, he prayed that in the event, the FIR is quashed, heavy costs should be imposed upon the petitioner, as the government machinery has been pressed and precious time of the Court has been consumed.

9. The Division Bench of Mumbai High Court in Nari Motiram Hira v. 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).

10. Therefore, I feel that unless and until, the decisions which have been referred above, 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.

11. Mr. Siddharth Luthra, ld. Sr. Counsel on instruction from Petitioner has come forward and wishes to donate Rs.10 Lacs for welfare purposes. I appreciate the gesture of the petitioner.

12. Accordingly, keeping the settlement dated 22.12.2011 and the statement of respondent no. 2 into view and in the interest of justice FIR no. 142/2011 of PS-EOW is quashed.

13. The petitioner is directed to pay Rs.1 Lac each in favour of the following:

i. Govt. Lady Noyee School for Deaf, Delhi Gate behind Ferozashah Stadium.

ii. Sr. Secondary School for Blind Boys, Sewa Kutir, B.B.M. Depot Road, Kingsway Camp, Delhi.

iii. School and Home for Mentally retarded Children, Avantika, Rohini, Sector I, Delhi.

iv. Nursery Primary School for Deaf, B Block, Kalkaji.

v. Nursery Primary School for Mentally Retarted, Mayur Vihar, Delhi.

vi. Middle School for Deaf, Sector 4, Rohini, Delhi.

vii. Welfare Fund for Destitute Women and Children, Nirmal Chaya, Jail Road, Tihar, New Delhi.

viii. Orphanage home, Alipur, Delhi.

14. All the concerned aforementioned are directed to keep this amount in the form of FDR, initially for a period of two years with any nationalised bank and interest accrued thereon shall be utilised for the welfare purposes of the needy children/women.

15. Petitioner is further directed to deposit an amount of Rs.2 Lacs in favour of "Bar Council of Delhi Indigent & Disabled Lawyers Account".

16. The aforesaid amount of Rs.10 Lacs shall be paid within two weeks from today and proof of the same shall be placed on record.

17. Crl. M.C. 27/2012 is allowed on the above terms.

18. Since main petition is allowed, Crl. M.A.88/2012 (Stay) become infructuous and disposed of as such.

19. Dasti.

SURESH KAIT, J

JANUARY 05, 2012 jg