Delhi High Court
Jayem Wareshousing Pvt Ltd & Anr vs State on 13 January, 2012
Author: Suresh Kait
$~42
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CRL.M.C. 146/2012
% Judgment delivered on: 13th January, 2012
JAYEM WARESHOUSING PVT LTD
& ANR ..... Petitioner
Through : Mr.Sanjay Abbot & Mr. Ankit
Aggarwal, Advs. for petitioner no. 1
Mr. Rakesh Mukhija and Mr. Rajesh Kr.
Singh, Advs. for petitioner no. 2.
versus
STATE ..... Respondent
Through: Ms.Rajdipa Behura, APP for State.
SI Rajesh, PS-Vasant Kunj (South).
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT
SURESH KAIT, J. (Oral)
Crl. M.A. 543/2012
Exemption is allowed subject to just exceptions.
Criminal M.A. stands disposed of.
+ Crl. M.C. 146/2012
1. Notice issued.
2. Ld. APP accepts notice on behalf of respondent.
3. The instant petition has been filed jointly by petitioner no. 1 /
complainant and petitioner no. 2 / accused.
4. Ld. Counsel for petitioners have jointly submitted that vide FIR
no. 146 dated 31.05.2010 case under Section 403/408/420/468/471/
120B Indian Penal Code, 1860 was registered against petitioner no. 2
on the complaint of petitioner no. 1 at PS-Vasant Kunj (South).
5. It is further submitted that petitioner no. 1 is no more interested
to pursue the case. Therefore, instant FIR may be quashed.
6. AR of petitioner no. 1 is personally present with his Counsels.
Ld. Counsels for petitioner no. 1 on instruction submits that petitioner
no. 1 has settled all the disputes qua the aforesaid FIR against
petitioner no. 2, therefore, if the instant FIR is quashed, he has no
objection.
7. As per the settlement, petitioner no. 2 has paid Rs.4 Lacs to
petitioner no. 1 by way of demand draft no. 285899 dated 20.10.2011
drawn on Vijaya Bank in the court, which he accepted without any
protest.
8. Ld. APP on the other submits that chargesheet is ready and it
could be filed at any stage. She further submits that Section 468/471
Indian Penal Code, 1860 are non compoundable. She further referred
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, she has prayed that till the matter is
decided by the larger Bench of the Apex Court, instant petition may be
adjourned sine-die. Alternatively, she prayed that in the event, the FIR
is quashed, heavy costs should be imposed upon the petitioner no. 2, as
the government machinery has been pressed into 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. Recently, the Supreme Court has observed in Shiji @ Pappu &
Ors. v. Radhika & Anr in Crl.Appeal No.2064/2011 decided on
14.11.2011 that the cases of non-compoundable nature can be
compounded, certainly not after the conviction.
11. 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.
12. Keeping in view the statement of AR of petitioner no. 1, I quash
FIR No. 146/2010 registered at PS-Vasant Kunj (South).
13. However, I found force in the submission of ld. APP and direct
petitioner no. 2 to pay some amount for the welfare purposes.
Ld. Counsel for respondent no. 2 on instruction has come forward and
submitted that petitioner no. 2 is willing to contribute Rs.1,00,000/- for
some welfare purposes. I appreciate this gesture. Therefore, I direct
petitioner no. 2 to pay the aforesaid amount of Rs.1,00,000/- in favour
of "Welfare Fund for Children and Destitute Women, Nirmal
Chahaya, Jail Road, Tihar, New Delhi" within two weeks from today.
Proof of the same shall be placed on record.
14. Superintendent, Nirmal Chahhaya is further directed to keep this
amount in FDR initially for a period of 2 years and get it renewed
periodically. Interest accrued thereon shall be utilized for the well
being of the children and destitute women.
15. Crl.M.C.146/2012 is allowed on the above terms.
16. Since the main petition is allowed, Crl. M.A.542/2012 (Stay)
become infructuous and disposed of as such.
17. Dasti.
SURESH KAIT, J
JANUARY 13, 2012
jg
