Punjab-Haryana High Court
Godawari @ Leela Rani @ Godavary vs State Of Punjab And Another on 21 March, 2024
Author: Gurvinder Singh Gill
Bench: Gurvinder Singh Gill
2024:PHHC:041511
In The High Court for the States of Punjab and Haryana
At Chandigarh
CRM-M-41009-2023 (O&M)
Date of Decision:- 21.03.2024
Godawari @ Leela Rani @ Godavary ... Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab and another ... Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURVINDER SINGH GILL
Present:- Mr. Munish Puri, Advocate, for the petitioner.
Mr. Vishvajeet Singh Virk, DAG, Punjab.
Ms. Kajal, Advocate for
Mr. Akshay Jain, Advocate, for respondent No.2.
*****
GURVINDER SINGH GILL, J. (Oral)
1. Petitioner-Godawari @ Leela Rani @ Godavary has approached this
Court seeking quashing of FIR No.0022 dated 26.03.2016, Police
Station Division No.1, District Pathankot, under Section 420 IPC, and
all subsequent proceedings emanating therefrom on the basis of a
compromise having been effected between the parties.
2. The FIR in question was lodged at the instance of SBI wherein it is
alleged that the petitioner had fradulently raised a loan by way of
integrity of this order/judgment
CRM-M-41009-2023 (O&M) -2- 2024:PHHC:041511
mortgaging a house which already stood mortgaged with another
bank.
3. It is the specific case of the petitioner that the matter has been
amicably resolved amongst the parties and that the settled amount
already stands paid. Learned counsel has produced a copy of
document issued by SBI which shows that he has deposited the entire
settled amount as per the settlement agreement dated 14.7.2023. The
same is taken on record. Learned counsel has also drawn the
attention of this Court to the settlement dated 14.7.2023 (Annexure P-
2).
4. This Court finds that during the course of pendency of the petition,
the matter had been referred to Mediation and Conciliation Centre of
this Court wherein the SBI was represented through Ms. Jyoti
Sharma, Chief Manager, Branch Dalhousie Road, Pathankot. As per
the settlement/agreement (Annexure P-2) entered into by the parties
before the Mediation and Conciliation Centre, a schedule of the
agreed payment was made and it was agreed that pursuant to the
amicable settlement, the bank would not have any objection for
quashing of the FIR.
5. Ms. Kajal, Advocate, proxy counsel for Sh. Akshay Jain, Advocate
has put in appearance on behalf of State Bank of India and has
endorsed the factum of compromise and has stated that the bank does
not have any objection for quashing of the instant FIR.
6. In view of the aforestated position wherein the matter is found to have
been amicably settled amongst the parties before Mediation and
integrity of this order/judgment
CRM-M-41009-2023 (O&M) -3- 2024:PHHC:041511
Conciliation Centre of this Court and the bank has also received the
entire settled amount and the counsel has categorically stated that the
Bank has no objection for quashing of the FIR, the present petition, as
such, is allowed and FIR No.0022 dated 26.03.2016, Police Station
Division No.1, District Pathankot, under Section 420 IPC and all
subsequent proceedings emanating therefrom are hereby quashed qua
the petitioner.
21.03.2024 (GURVINDER SINGH GILL)
mohan JUDGE
Whether speaking /reasoned Yes / No
Whether Reportable Yes / No
integrity of this order/judgment
