Uttarakhand High Court
WPCRL/1063/2023 on 11 March, 2024
Author: Manoj Kumar Tiwari
Bench: Manoj Kumar Tiwari
Office Notes,
reports, orders
SL. or proceedings
Date COURT'S OR JUDGES'S ORDERS
No or directions and
Registrar's order
with Signatures
WPCRL 1063/2023
WPCRL 1071/2023
WPCRL 1072/2023
WPCRL 1077/2023
Hon'ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.
Ms. Geeta Luthra and Mr.
Arvind Vashistha, Senior Counsel,
assisted by Mr. P.V. Misra, Mr. Manas
Agrawal, Mr. Sagar Kothari and Mr. Kapil
Arora, Counsel for the petitioners.
Mr. R.K. Joshi, Brief Holder, for
the State.
Mr. Aditya Singh, Advocate, for
the complainant/respondent no. 3.
Mr. R.P. Nautiyal, Senior
Counsel, assisted by Mr. Pawan Kumar
Nath, Mr. Himanshu Kohli and Ms.
Garima Thapa, Counsel for the
intervener.
(2) In these writ petitions,
petitioners have prayed that FIR No.
0060 of 2023, lodged against them in PS
Jhan Kaieya, District Udham Singh
Nagar, for the offences punishable under
Sections 120B, 420, 467, 468 and 471
IPC, and the consequent proceedings
emanating therefrom be quashed.
(3) Initially, the writ petitions were
sought to be allowed on merits as it was
contended by petitioners that no offence
is made out against them and the
complainant has tried to give criminal
colour to a dispute, which was civil in
nature. However, now, petitioners have
moved miscellaneous applications
(IA/6/2024), whereby they have prayed
that the impugned FIR be quashed
against the accused-petitioners in the
light of the settlement-agreement arrived
at between the parties on 28.2.2024.
Settlement-agreement entered into
between the parties has been enclosed
as Annexure-1 to the said application.
(4) Complainant Dr. R.C. Rastogi
(respondent no. 3), duly identified by his
Counsel Mr. Aditya Singh, appeared
before this Court virtually and submitted
that the dispute has now been amicably
settled and now he has no grudge left in
the matter and, therefore, the FIR be
quashed in terms of the settlement
agreement arrived at between the
parties. He submitted that he entered
into compromise voluntarily and without
any coercion or undue influence. He has
drawn attention of this Court to the
terms of settlement set out in para 2 of
the agreement.
(5) Ms. Geeta Luthrra, learned
Senior Counsel appearing for the
petitioners, cited the judgment rendered
by Hon'ble Supreme Court in Narinder
Singh & Others v. State of Punjab &
Another, reported as (2014) 6 SCC 466,
and prayed that the FIR be quashed in
terms of the settlement-agreement.
(6) Mr. Aditya Singh, learned
Counsel for the complainant, also
supports the submission made by
learned Senior Counsel appearing for
petitioners and submits that since the
dispute had a commercial colour, which
has now been settled between the
parties, therefore, impugned FIR may be
quashed in view of the settled law on the
point. He submits that none of the
offences is so heinous in nature which
may warrant rejection of prayer of
quashing.
(7) Mr. R.P. Nautiyal, Senior
Advocate appearing for the Interim
Resolution Professional (intervener),
appointed by NCLT, Allahabad Bench,
submits that he has no objection if the
prayer made by the petitioners is
granted in view of the settlement arrived
at between the parties.
(8) Since both the parties have
admitted that a compromise have been
effected by them and the same is
genuine and valid, I am satisfied that the
said compromise has been arrived at
with the free consent of the parties and
without any undue influence or coercion
from any side. Accordingly, considering
the law laid down in Narinder Singh case
(supra), wherein Hon'ble Supreme Court
has observed that when the parties have
reached the settlement and on that basis
petition for quashing the criminal
proceedings is filed, the guiding factor in
such cases would be to secure: (i) ends
of justice, or (ii) to prevent abuse of the
process of any court, while exercising the
power the High Court is to form an
opinion on either of the aforesaid two
objectives, and also considering that
none of the alleged offences fall in the
category of heinous offences, which can
be treated as crime against the society,
this Court is inclined to allow the
miscellaneous applications.
(9) Accordingly, miscellaneous
applications are allowed. Impugned FIR
No. 0060 of 2023, lodged in PS Jhan
Kaieya, District Udham Singh Nagar, for
the offences punishable under Sections
120B, 420, 467, 468 and 471 IPC, and
the consequent proceedings emanating
therefrom are quashed qua the
petitioners.
(10) Writ petitions are disposed of in
the above terms.
(Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.)
11.3.2024
Pr
