Delhi High Court - Orders
Moti Lal Jain vs State, Gnct Delhi & Ors on 30 September, 2021
Author: Yogesh Khanna
Bench: Yogesh Khanna
$~5
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CRL.M.C. 2143/2021
MOTI LAL JAIN ..... Petitioner
Through : Mr.Anuj Jain, Advocate.
versus
STATE, GNCT DELHI & ORS. ..... Respondents
Through : Mr.Kamal Kr.Ghai, APP for State
with SI Neeraj PS Preet Vihar.
Mr.Abhinav Tyagi, Advocate for
respondents No.2 & 3 with both
respondents in person.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YOGESH KHANNA
ORDER
% 30.09.2021
1. The hearing has been conducted through Video Conferencing.
2. Petitioner file this petition for quashing of the FIR No.101/2013 under Section 420/468/471/120B Indian Penal Code registered at police station Preet Vihar, Delhi against them and the proceedings emanating therefrom, which was got registered by the respondents No.2 & 3.
3. The facts are on 26.03.1985 the petitioner herein alongwith his two brothers namely Bir Sain Jain and Jagdish Prasad Jain entered into an Agreement to Sell on 26.03.1985 with Jugal Kishore Abbott for purchase of property No.9/16, South Patel Nagar, New Delhi measuring 200 sq. yard for the total consideration of Rs.3.00 lacs. The said amount was paid in full by 23.01.1986. On 22.09.1988 Jugal Kishore Abbott died. In the year 1992, original lease deed and conveyance deed of the said property were delivered to the petitioner. But somehow the title documents went missing and in the Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:VIJAYA LAKSHMI DOBHAL Signing Date:01.10.2021 10:41 year 2003 the NCR was registered. The petitioner applied for mutation and conversion of the property on the basis of the registered sale deed dated 28.07.2003 by two brothers in his favour. On 18.09.2009 on the complaint of petitioner an FIR No.416/2009 under Section 385/506 IPC was registered against one Sanjay Singh (brother in law of Sudhir Abbott), Tarun and Amit. Two ladies namely Ragini Choudhary and Archana Grover, married daughters of late Jugal Kishore Abbott also filed objections before the office of L & DO. In the year 2012, Sudhir Abbott filed a complaint with EOW, Delhi Police, but later withdrew it in the year 2013. The respondents No.2 & 3 herein lodged the case against Sudhir Abbott, Sunil Grover, V.K. Chaudhary for criminal conspiracy, forgery and cheating etc. However, during the pendency, on 13.03.2020, amicable settlement was arrived at before Delhi High Court Mediation and Conciliation Centre between the parties to this petition as also Pawan Kumar Sharma and Vikas Attray in CS (OS) No.178/2016 involving this matter and another Civil Suit No.610481/2016. The Civil Suit No.610481/2016 filed by petitioner herein was decreed on 24.07.2020 the basis of the compromise dated 13.03.2020 and an amount of Rs.60.00 lacs was paid by petitioner to respondent No.3 alongwith Pawan Kumar Sharma and Vikas Attray. On 28.07.2020, CS (OS) No.178/2016 filed by Pawan Kumar Sharma, respondent no.2 and Vikas Attray was withdrawn pursuant to settlement dated 13.3.2020 and an amount of Rs.40.00 lacs paid pursuant to the said settlement by petitioner to respondent No.3 alongwith Pawan Kumar Sharma and Vikas Attray.
4. Between August and September 2020 the endorsement of cancellation was done on sale deed dated 17.10.2014 in terms of settlement dated 13.03.2020 by the office of Sub Registrar and Rs.20.00 lacs was paid Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:VIJAYA LAKSHMI DOBHAL Signing Date:01.10.2021 10:41 pursuant to the said settlement by petitioner to respondent No.3 alongwith Pawan Kumar Sharma and Vikas Attray.
5. Pursuant to above settlement, petitioner has paid an amounts to Vikas Attray, respondent No.3, and Pawan Kumar Sharma vide demand drafts bearing No.411983, 411984, 411985 for Rs.5.00 lacs, Rs.22.50 lacs and Rs.22.50lacs respectively, all dated 13.09.2021 drawn on SBI, Lawrence Road, Delhi.
6. The copy of settlement agreement dated 13.03.2020 is annexed as Annexure P4 to this petition.
7. The petitioner and both respondents No.2 & 3 are present, have been duly identified by their respective counsels state they shall abide by the terms and conditions of the settlement agreement dated 13.03.2020 arrived before the Delhi High Court Mediation and Conciliation Centre, New Delhi. The respondents No.2 & 3 further asserts in view of above settlement, since the matter has been settled with the petitioners, they do not intend to pursue the matter further and have no objection if the FIR is quashed against the petitioners. The learned APP for the State has also no objection, if this petition is allowed.
8. Considering the above settlement between the parties, there is no use to proceed with the criminal case as complainant has settled all the disputes with the petitioners. In view of the above, there is no use to continue with the proceedings against petitioners as it would never entail in conviction of petitioners.
9. Accordingly, the petition is allowed. Consequently, FIR No.101/2013 under Section 420/468/471/120B Indian Penal Code registered at police station Preet Vihar, Delhi and the proceedings emanating therefrom are Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:VIJAYA LAKSHMI DOBHAL Signing Date:01.10.2021 10:41 quashed. Pending application, if any, also stands disposed of. No order as to costs.
YOGESH KHANNA, J.
SEPTEMBER 30, 2021 M Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:VIJAYA LAKSHMI DOBHAL Signing Date:01.10.2021 10:41