Delhi High Court
Mr. Kapil Dua And Another vs State And Another on 11 September, 2018
$~90
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Judgment delivered on: 11.09.2018
+ CRL.M.C. 4590/2018
MR. KAPIL DUA AND ANOTHER ..... Petitioners
versus
STATE AND ANOTHER ..... Respondents
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Petitioners : Mr.Brij Bhushan Solanki, Adv.
For the Respondents: Mr.Sanjeev Sabharwal, APP.
SI Devi Lal PS Maurya Enclave.
Mr.Abhimanyu Chauhan, Adv. for R-2.
CORAM:-
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA
JUDGMENT
11.09.2018
SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J. (ORAL)
Crl.M.A. 31760/2018 (exemption)
Exemption is allowed subject to all just exceptions
Crl.M.C.4590/2018
1. Petitioners seek quashing of FIR No.207/2015 under Sections
419/420/423/506/120B IPC, Police Station Maurya Enclave.
2. The allegations against the petitioners are that the petitioners
had alleged to transfer certain properties based on a notarized
documents and it subsequently transpired that petitioner had no right,
title or interest to the properties sought to be sold, complainant had
paid a sum of Rs.6 lacs to the petitioner.
3. Parties have settled their disputes through the process of
mediation held before Delhi Mediation Centre, Rohini District Courts,
Delhi dated 30.08.2018 has been executed between the parties. As per
the settlement, the petitioner has agreed to pay a sum of
Rs.15,50,000/- to respondent no. 2. A sum of Rs.10,00,000/- has
already been paid. The balance sum of Rs.5,50,000/- has been paid to
the respondent No.2 by way of Demand Draft No.578897 dated
10.09.2018 drawn on Canara Bank.
4. Respondent No.2 is present in person, represented by counsel
and is identified by the Investigating Officer. He submits that he has
settled disputes with the petitioners and does not wish to press charges
against the petitioners and prosecute the complaint any further.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner points out that in terms of
order dated 23.07.2015 and 14.09.2015 by which the bail was granted,
petitioners had deposited FDRs in the sum of Rs.6 lacs each, with the
Trial Court, as a condition for grant of bail.
6. In view of the fact that the parties have resolved their disputes
and respondent No. 2 does not wish to press his complaint,
continuation of criminal proceedings will be an exercise in futility and
justice in the case demands that the dispute between the parties is put
to an end and peace is restored; securing the ends of justice being the
ultimate guiding factor. It would be expedient to quash the subject
FIR and the consequent proceedings emanating therefrom.
7. In view of the above, the petition is allowed. FIR No.207/2015
under Sections 419/420/423/506/120B IPC, Police Station Maurya
Enclave and the consequent proceedings emanating therefrom are,
accordingly quashed.
8. The sureties furnished by the petitioners for grant of bail be
discharged and directed to be released to the petitioners.
9. Order Dasti under signatures of the Court Master.
SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J
SEPTEMBER 11, 2018
ab
