Madhya Pradesh High Court

Rajendra Upadhyay vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 6 May, 2022

Author: Gurpal Singh Ahluwalia

                              1
         THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                      MCRC-19106-2022
         Rajendra Upadhyay Vs. State of MP and another

Gwalior, Dated : 06/05/2022

      Shri Anil Kumar Mishra, Counsel for the applicant.

      Shri C.P. Singh, Counsel for the respondent No. 1/State.

Shri Vijay Dutta Sharma, Counsel for the respondent No. 2.

This application under Section 482 of CrPC has been filed for

quashment of FIR in Crime No.246/2021 registered at Police Station

Sirol Distt. Gwalior for offence under Sections 420, 409 of IPC on the

basis of compromise.

It is submitted by the counsel for the applicant that the

respondent No. 2 lodged an FIR that the applicant by cheating the

respondent No. 2, his father, his brother and mother have

misappropriated amount of Rs.9.00 lacs, Rs.9.00 lacs, Rs.9.00 lacs and

Rs.10.00 lacs respectively.

It was alleged that government land situated in Alapur, Tahsil

and District Gwalior area 6.218 hectare was allotted on permanent

lease to Annapurna Grih Nirman Sahkari Sanstha Maryadit, Gwalior.

For allotment of the permanent lease, the applicant was in need of

Rs.1,87,35,859/- and, accordingly, he persuaded the respondent No. 2

to become a member of Society and even prior to execution of

permanent lease deed, plots were also allotted to them. It is alleged

that an amount of Rs.9.00 lacs was given by respondent No. 2 through

cheque on 24.03.2009. Similarly, on the same day, a cheque of Rs.9.00

THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH MCRC-19106-2022 Rajendra Upadhyay Vs. State of MP and another

lacs was given by his brother Sunil Sancheti. On the very same day,

his father had given cheque of Rs.9.00 lacs and his mother Shakuntala

Sancheti gave a Rs.10.00 lacs on 10.06.2009 and in all an amount of

Rs.37.00 lacs were taken by the applicant. The applicant had also

violated Clause 8 of the Allotment Order. It is alleged that after

making arrangement of Rs.1,87,35,859/- the said amount was

deposited by the applicant and, accordingly, on 14.08.2009 a lease

deed was executed in favour of Annapurna Grih Nirman Sahkari

Sanstha Maryadit, Gwalior. The applicant was the President of the said

Society. However, the applicant was avoiding in executing the lease

deed in favour of the respondent No. 2 as well as his brother, father

and mother, whereas he has already executed a lease deed in favour of

other members. On 25.03.2021 the respondent No. 2, his father,

mother and brother came to know that the applicant is executing lease

deed in favour of the members and when they requested him to

execute lease deed in their favour, then it was specifically refused by

the applicant and he also refused to return the amount of Rs.37.00 lacs

along with interest. On this complaint, FIR in Crime No.246/2021 was

registered at Police Station Sirol Distt. Gwalior.

It is submitted that now the parties have compromised the

matter. The amount has been returned back by the applicant to the

respondent No. 2 as well as his brother, father and mother. They have

THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH MCRC-19106-2022 Rajendra Upadhyay Vs. State of MP and another

also executed affidavits in this regard and postdated cheques have also

been given. It is further stated that respondent No. 2, his father

Rajendra Sancheti, his mother Shakuntala Sancheti and his brother

Sunil Sancheti have also tendered their resignation for the

membership of the Annapurna Grih Nirman Sahkari Sanstha Maryadit,

Gwalior and now they do not have any claim in the property or over

any plot belonging to Annapurna Grih Nirman Sahkari Sanstha

Maryadit, Gwalior. Accordingly, this Court by order dated 21.04.2022

had directed the parties to appear before the Principal Registrar of this

Court for verification of factum of compromise. The Principal

Registrar after recording the statement of the witnesses has given the

following report:-

"As per direction of the Hon'ble Chief Justice, and norms of Social Distancing has been maintained amongst the parties and advocates during pandemic covid-19 vide circular dated 18-06-2020.

In compliance with Hon'ble Court order dated 21-04-2022 the matter has been placed before me for verification of compromise.

Complainant/Respondent No.2 Sanjay Sacheti and other victim: Rajendra Sacheti, Sunil Sacheti, are present Alongwith their Counsel Shri Ashish Saxena who has identified them. But Complainant/Victim Smt. Shakuntla Sacheti is not present today for Compromise.

Accused/Applicant Rajendra upadhyay S/o Shri Atmaram Upadhyay is present alongwith his Counsel Shri Palendra Dangi who has identified him.

Present parties have submitted copy of their Aadhar Cards regarding their identification.

Present parties have filed I.A. No.6125/2022 and I.A. No. 6126/2022 for compromise alongwith

THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH MCRC-19106-2022 Rajendra Upadhyay Vs. State of MP and another

their affidavits for compromise at the time of registration.

Statement of Complainant/Respondent No.2 Sanjay Sacheti and other victim : Rajendra Sacheti, Sunil Sacheti And Accused/Applicant Rajendra upadhyay S/o Shri Atmaram Upadhyay are recorded. Matter perused, inquired and verified as to factum of compromise.

After verifying from Complainant/Respondent No.2 Sanjay Sacheti and other victim Rajendra Sacheti, Sunil Sacheti And Accused/Applicant Rajendra upadhyay S/o Shri Atmaram Upadhyay that they have arrived at compromise voluntarily, without any threat, inducement and coercion.

According to Sec.320 of CRPC the offence u/S 420 of the I.P.C. is compoundable with permission to the court. But u/S 409 of the I.P.C. is not Compoundable.