Gujarat High Court
Sunilkumar Nandkishor Gupta vs State Of Gujarat on 13 January, 2021
Bench: Nikhil S. Kariel
R/SCR.A/708/2016 ORDER
IN THEHIGHCOURTOF GUJARATAT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIALCRIMINALAPPLICATIONNO. 708 of 2016
==========================================================
SUNILKUMARNANDKISHORGUPTA
Versus
STATEOF GUJARAT& 1 other(s)
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR. BHADRISHS RAJU(6676)for the Applicant(s)No. 1
MRTANMAYB KARIA(6833)for the Respondent(s)No. 2
MS. MOXATHAKKARADDL.PUBLICPROSECUTOR(2)for the Respondent(s)No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIKHIL S. KARIEL
Date: 13/01/2021
ORALORDER
1. Rule. Learned Addl. Public Prosecutor Ms. Moxa Thakkar
waives service of Rule on behalf of the respondent-State.
Learned Advocate Shri. Tanmay B. Karia waives service on
behalf of the respondent No.2, original-complainant.
2. Learned Advocate Shri. Karia, for the respondent no.2
further submits that the original-complainant may be
permitted to join the meeting. Permission is granted.
3. Learned Advocate Shri. Bhadrish S. Raju on behalf of the
applicant-accused no.2 has submitted that the present
application has been preferred praying for quashing of Criminal
Complaint being I CR No. No. 4/2016, registered with
Ellisbridge Police Station, Ahmedabad on 5.01.2016 for the
offences punishable under Sections 403, 406, 417, 420, 503,
506, 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code. He further submits
R/SCR.A/708/2016 ORDER
that,originally the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court (Coram : J.B
Paridwala,J) vide order dated 02.02.2016, had been pleased to
issue notice. He further submits that in the interregnum,
during the the pendency of the present application, the parties
have settled the dispute inter se and an affidavit dated
12.1.2021 is prepared by the applicant as per which affidavit
an amount of Rs 30 Lakhs which was deposited by the
applicant as the condition for releasing him on regular bail by
this Court (Coram : A.J Desai,J.) in Criminal Misc. Application
No. 3460/2016 vide order dated 24.2.2016, can be directed to
be transferred to the original complainant and furthermore he
also submits that over and above the amount of Rs 30 Lakhs,
he has assured/agreed to pay the original complainant an
additional amount of Rs 5 Lakhs vide cheque bearing
No.112718 dated 12.1.2021, Ahmedabad Branch.
4. Heard learned Advocate Shri. Tanmay Karia, appearing
for the original-complainant Shri. Ashok Bansal, who is
permitted to join the meeting through Video Conferencing and
who has been identified by learned Advocate Shri. Karia. Both
the learned Advocate as well as the complainant have
confirmed that the settlement has indeed been arrived at
between the complainant and the applicant -original accused
no. 2. Learned Advocate Shri Karia further submits that the
settlement was agreed on terms as mentioned by original-
applicant vide an affidavit filed by him on 12.1.2021. An online
copy of this affidavit has been provided to this Court today.
Learned Advocate for the complainant and the applicant also
submit that they would not have any objection if the criminal
complaint is quashed qua the applicant herein.
R/SCR.A/708/2016 ORDER
5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor Ms. Moxa Thakkar,
submits that since serious allegations have been leveled
against the applicant-accused no. 2, this Court may not show
any indulgence inspite of settlement between the parties.
6. Having heard learned Advocates for the respective
parties and more particularly, considering the affidavit filed by
the applicant on 12.1.2021 and also considering the judgments
of the Supreme Court in the cases of Gian Singh Vs. State of
Punjab & Anr., reported in (2012) 10SCC 303, Madan
Mohan Abbot Vs. State of Punjab, reported in (2008) 4
SCC 582, Nikhil Merchant Vs. Cenral Bureau of
Investigation & Anr., reported in 2009 (1) GLH 31,
Manoj Sharma Vs. State & Ors., reported in 2009 (1)
GLH 190 and Narinder Singh & Ors. Vs. Sate of Punajb &
Anr reported in 2014 (2) Crime 67(SC) and considering
essentially, the dispute is of private nature and since the
complainant confirms the settlement and his consent for
quashing the complaint. This Court is of the opinion that no
fruitful purpose would be served, if the complaint is proceeded
any further.
7. In view of the same, the trial Court being the Additional
Chief Metropolitan, Court No.11, Ahmedabad, where the
amount of Rs 30 Lakhs had been deposited by the applicant
Shri Sunilkumar Nandkishor Gupta in compliance with the
order dated 24.2.2016 passed in Criminal Misc. Application No.
3460/2016 shall pay the amount deposited being Rs 30 Lakhs
along with interest accrued thereon, by way of cheque /pay
order in favour of Shri Ashokkumar Mohanlal Bansal-original
complainant, after proper verification, within 15 days of the
R/SCR.A/708/2016 ORDER
receipt of this order.
8. The applicant herein is also directed to hand over the
cheque of Rs 5 Lakhs as mentioned hereinabove to learned
advocate for the complainant during the course of the day.
9. Learned advocate Shri Raju further submits that the
charge sheet has been filed in the criminal complaint and the
said criminal complaint has culminated into criminal case No.
111 of 2016 pending before the Additional Chief Metropolitan
Magistrate Court No.11, Ahmedabad and he further submits
that this Court while quashing the impugned complaint qua
the applicant herein may further be pleased to quash the
proceedings of Criminal Case No. 111 of 2016 qua the
applicant as a consequence of quashing of the complaint.
10. In view of the arrangement as above, the criminal
complaint being I-CR No. 4/2016 registered with Ellisbridge
Police Station, Ahmedabad stands quashed qua the applicant
herein.
11. As a consequence of the the impugned complaint being
quashed resultant Criminal Case No. 111 of 2016 pending
before the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate No. 11,
Ahmedabad also stands quashed qua the applicant herein Shri
Sunilkumar Nandkishor Gupta.
12. Since the criminal complaint as well as resultant
criminal case stand quashed qua the applicant herein, he is at
liberty to take appropriate steps for release of his passport
etc.
R/SCR.A/708/2016 ORDER
13. Learned Advocate Shri Raju is permitted to file affidavit
dated 12.1.2021 before the Registry. Rule is made absolute to
the aforesaid extent. Direct service is permitted through
electronic mode.
(NIKHILS. KARIEL,J)
MARYVADAKKAN
