Delhi High Court
Suranjan De & Anr. vs State & Anr. on 27 July, 2017
$~24
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(CRL) 703/2017
SURANJAN DE & ANR. ..... Petitioners
Through: Mr. Anupam Dwivedi, Advocate along
with petitioners in person.
versus
STATE & ANR. ..... Respondents
Through: Ms. Nandita Rao, ASC for the State with
SI Ravi Shankar Tyagi, PS Saket, Delhi.
Mr. Harvir Singh Taneja, Advocate along with Mr.
Danie Robert, AR of the respondent no.
2/company.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD GOEL
ORDER
% 27.07.2017
1. The petitioners have invoked the writ jurisdiction of this court under
Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 of the
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short 'Cr.PC') for quashing of
the FIR bearing No. 441/2016, registered on 30.05.2016 with PS
Saket, Delhi, under Section 408 IPC.
2. It is submitted that the petitioner no.1 was working as Chief Executive
Officer with the respondent no. 2 company/complainant w.e.f.
14.06.2013, whereas the petitioner no. 2 was Deputy General
Manager (Operations) w.e.f. 02.02.2015. The petitioner no. 1 is
stated to have resigned from the respondent no. 2 company on
04.08.2015, whereas the services of the petitioner no. 2 were
terminated by the respondent no. 2 vide termination letter dated
29.01.2016. The petitioner no. 1 was provided one Car, I-Pad, Laptop
and some other movables by the respondent no. 2 because of his
working as Chief Executive Officer with the respondent no. 2. The
petitioner no. 2 was to pay Rs.5,00,000/- to the respondent no. 2. As
the petitioner no. 1 did not return movable assets to the respondent
no.2 company/complainant and the petitioner no. 2 did not pay the
outstanding amount, the said FIR was registered on the complaint of
the respondent no. 2
3. There were certain litigations at the instance of the petitioners as also
on behalf of the respondent no. 2 against each other.
4. The matter was referred to the Mediation Centre, Saket Courts, Delhi
between the petitioner no. 1 and the respondent no. 2, which was
amicably resolved before the learned Mediator on 15.11.2016. As per
this mediation settlement both the parties had agreed to withdraw all
their respective litigation/counter claim. The respondent no. 2 had
agreed to pay Rs.5,00,000/- to the petitioner no. 1 in full and final
settlement of his claim. The petitioner no. 1 has also agreed to return
all the movable assets to the respondent no. 2 company.
5. The matter between the petitioner no. 2 and the respondent no.2 was
also referred to the Mediation Centre, Saket Court, New Delhi. They
also settled their all disputes on 07.01.2017. As per this mediation
settlement, the respondent no. 2 had agreed to pay a total sum of
Rs.3,00,000/- to the petitioner no. 2 in full and final settlement of his
claim. They had also agreed to withdraw all the litigations pending
between them.
6. Both the petitioners and the respondent no. 2 had also agreed that on
filing of the quashing petition under Section 482 of the Cr.PC, the
respondent no.2 will have no objection for quashing of the FIR.
7. The Chief Executive Officer of the respondent no. 2 through counsel
submits that they have received back all their movables from the
petitioner no. 1. He also submits that no dues are now pending
against the petitioner no. 2. He further submits that pursuant to the
mediation settlement they had paid a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- to the
petitioner no. 1 and a sum of Rs.3,00,000/- to the petitioner no. 2.
Both the petitioners present in the court through their counsel submit
that they had received their respective settlement amount from the
respondent no. 2.
8. It is also submitted that the petitioner no. 2 had withdrawn his
complaint case bearing CC No. 185/1/2016 from the court of Sh.
Rajinder Singh, Ld.MM, Dwarka Court, Delhi on 13.01.2017. He
further submits that the petitioner no. 1 had withdrawn his civil suit
being CS 8248/2016 from the court of Dr. Ajay Gulati, ADJ, Saket
Courts, Delhi on 17.12.2016. He further submits that the complaint
case no. 463879/2016 filed by the petitioner no. 1 against the
respondent no. 2 company had been withdrawn from the court of
learned ACMM, Saket, Delhi on 24.10.2016. It is submitted by the
learned counsel for the respondent no. 2 that they have withdrawn
their counter claim vide CS No. 9146/2016 filed against the petitioner
no. 1 from the court of learned ADJ, Saket Court, Delhi on
17.12.2016. Learned counsel for petitioner No.2 submits that
petitioner No. 2 had also withdrawn his civil suit no. 8775/2016
against the respondent no. 2 from the court of Ld. ADJ, Saket Court,
Delhi on 08.02.2017.
9. It is submitted by both the petitioners present in person and Chief
Executive Officers of the respondent no. 2 company through their
respective counsels that nothing is due and recoverable by them
against each other. The petitioners and the Chief Executive Officer of
the respondent no. 2 submit that they had willingly settled the matter
without any force or coercion. The CEO of respondent No.2 submits
that they do not want to pursue the FIR. He submits that FIR may be
quashed.
10. In these circumstances, when the matter has been amicably settled
between the parties and no purpose would be served in further
pursuing with the FIR bearing No. 441/2016, registered on
30.05.2016 with PS Saket, Delhi, under Section 408 IPC. Hence, to
secure ends of justice, the FIR bearing No. 441/2016, registered on
30.05.2016 with PS Saket, Delhi, under Section 408 IPC and
proceedings arising out of the same are hereby quashed.
11. The petition is disposed of.
VINOD GOEL, J.
JULY 27, 2017
"sk"
