Delhi High Court - Orders
Preeti Bansal vs K L Narang on 22 February, 2023
Author: Jasmeet Singh
Bench: Jasmeet Singh
$~53
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CRL.M.C. 1243/2023, CRL.M.A. 4750/2023 & CRL.M.A.
4751/2023.
PREETI BANSAL
..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Anuj Chauhan and Ms. Ritika
Prasad, Advocates.
versus
K L NARANG
..... Respondent
Through: Appearance not given.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASMEET SINGH
ORDER
% 22.02.2023 This is a petition seeking quashing of proceedings initiated by the respondent under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act, in Complaint Case No. 11614/17 before the learned CMM Rouse Avenue Courts, New Delhi.
The parties have arrived at the settlement dated 02.06.2022 before the Delhi Mediation Centre, Patiala House Courts, New Delhi wherein, the petitioners were to pay a sum of Rs. 34.5 Lakhs to the respondent in instalments starting from 20.08.2022. Till 20.02.2023, a sum of Rs. 17,50,000/- had to be paid but only a sum of Rs. 2 lakhs has been paid.
It is stated by Mr. Chauhan, learned counsel for petitioner that an application for revival of proceedings Section 421 Cr.P.C seeking to treat the settlement as a decree and to issue warrants against the applicant has been made. There is no formal order passed on the said application.
Perusal of the order dated 19.07.2022 shows that the learned MM has Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed byAMIT ARORA Signing Date:01.03.2023 09:54:57 been pleased to record that there was nothing to be adjudicated in the matter and the complainant had withdrawn the complaint. The operative portion of the order dated 19.07.2022 read as under:
".... As nothing else remains to be adjudicated in the present matter, the complainant is allowed to withdraw the same. Matter now stands compounded between the parties. Accused stands acquitted, subject to the terms and conditions in this order.
File be consigned to record room after due compliance. Original documents, if any be returned to rightful claimant against due acknowledgement. Bail bonds/surety bonds, if any, stands discharged."
In this view of the matter, petitioner has already been acquitted there is no complaint, hence the petition seeking quashing of the proceedings under Section 138 NI Act is pre mature.
The judgement of this Court tited as „M/s Tulsiani Constructions and Developers Ltd. V/s State of NCT of Delhi' relied upon by the petitioner is misconceived as in that case, the petitioners were declared absconders under Section 82 & 83. The same is not there in the presnt case. In case the petitioner has any subsequent cause of action, he shall be at liberty to initiate appropriate proceedings in accordance with law.
Granting the said liberty, the petition is dismissed.
JASMEET SINGH, J FEBRUARY 22, 2023/st Click here to check corrigendum, if any Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed byAMIT ARORA Signing Date:01.03.2023 09:54:57