Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Delhi High Court - Orders

Flying Saucer E-Commerce Pvt Ltd vs State Of Nct Of Delhi & Ors on 9 July, 2021

Author: Yogesh Khanna

Bench: Yogesh Khanna

                                $~37
                                *    IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
                                +    CRL.M.C. 1474/2021
                                     FLYING SAUCER E-COMMERCE PVT LTD                        ..... Petitioner
                                                       Through : Mr.Satyam Thareja, Advocate.
                                                       versus
                                     STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS                       ...... Respondents
                                                       Through : Mr.Izhar Ahmed, APP for the State
                                                                   with Inspector Arun Tyagi in person.
                                                                   Mr.Ayush Jain, Mr.Tushar Thakur,
                                                                   Mr.Vashvardhan Upadhayay and
                                                                   Mr.Ritik Raghuvanshi, Advocates for
                                                                   complainant with R2 person.
                                                                   Respondents No.3 to 5 in person.
                                     CORAM:
                                     HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YOGESH KHANNA
                                                       ORDER

                                %                      09.07.2021
                                1.   The hearing has been conducted through Video Conferencing.
                                Crl.M.A.No.          /2021 (To be numbered)

2. Exemption allowed, subject to the condition that petitioner will file the duly sworn/attested affidavit and the requisite Court fee within 72 hours from the date of resumption of the regular functioning of this Court.

3. The application stands disposed of.

4. Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

5. The application stands disposed of.

6. Petitioners file this petition for quashing of the FIR No.98/2021 under Section 406/120B Indian Penal Code registered at police station Special Cell against them and the proceedings emanating therefrom.

7. The petitioner is allegedly a company incorporated under the Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:VIJAYA LAKSHMI DOBHAL Signing Date:09.07.2021 17:00 companies Act and respondents No.3 and 5 are its directors and respondent No.4 was the erstwhile director of petitioner. The complainant of the FIR is the respondent No.2 herein.

8. The facts are petitioner and respondent No. 2 got into a collaboration agreement in September, 2016 pursuant to which both entities engaged into the activity of providing opportunity to citizens of India to trade in digital assets. However, sometime in 2017, differences arose between petitioner and respondent No. 2 with respect to mode / modality of transfer of amount of Rs.29,84,70,136/-. During the period 2017-2021, petitioner received interest of more than Rs.8.00 Crores on the aforesaid sum. The respondent No.2 filed a complaint raising grievance alleging criminal misappropriation / criminal breach of trust on account of non refund of amounts and present FIR was registered.

9. The petitioner, respondents No.3 & 5 as well as respondent No.2 have amicably settled the matter and entered into MOU dated 23.06.2021, which is on record. As per the compromise, the petitioner and respondents No.3 & 5 have made the payment of Rs.33.07 Crores to the respondent No.2 herein. All the parties to the MOU are present and their affidavits are on the record. The parties have agreed to abide by the terms and conditions as enumerated in clauses No.1- 9 of the MOU dated 23.06.2021.

10. The complainant/respondent No.2 has been duly identified by the Investigating Officer, states the matter has been settled with the petitioner and they have no objection if the FIR is quashed against the petitioner and respondent 3 to 5. The respondents No.3 & 5 - directors of the petitioner are also present. The learned APP for the State has also no objection, if this petition is allowed. However, the petitioner be put to some terms as Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:VIJAYA LAKSHMI DOBHAL Signing Date:09.07.2021 17:00 government machinery has been utilised in registration of the FIR.

11. Considering the above settlement between the parties, there is no use to proceed with the criminal case as complainant has settled all the disputes and has received the settled amount from the petitioner. The continuation of proceedings against petitioner would be sheer wastage and would not entail in conviction of petitioner.

12. Accordingly, the petition is allowed. Consequently, FIR No.98/2021 under Section 406/120B Indian Penal Code registered at police station Special Cell and the proceedings emanating therefrom are quashed. Pending application, if any, also stands disposed of, subject to deposit of cost of Rs.25,000/- by the petitioner with the Delhi High Court Legal Services Committee within a month from today. Copy of cost deposit shall be furnished by the petitioners before the Investigating Officer/SHO concerned.

YOGESH KHANNA, J.

JULY 09, 2021 M Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:VIJAYA LAKSHMI DOBHAL Signing Date:09.07.2021 17:00