Delhi High Court - Orders
Sanjeev Kumar Sharma & Anr vs State Of Nct Of Delhi & Anr on 1 October, 2021
Author: Manoj Kumar Ohri
Bench: Manoj Kumar Ohri
$~33
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CRL.M.C. 2025/2021
SANJEEV KUMAR SHARMA & ANR. ..... Petitioners
Through: Mr. Prateek Gupta, Advocate.
Versus
STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Hirein Sharma, APP for State with
Inspector Satyavir Janaula, P.S. Bindapur
Mr. Kapil Goyal, Advocate for R-2 alongwith R-2
in person.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR OHRI
(VIA VIDEO CONFERENCING)
ORDER
% 01.10.2021
1. The present petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. on behalf of the petitioners seeking quashing of FIR No. 10/2015 registered under Sections 420/408/468/471/506/120B IPC & Section 65 of the IT Act at P.S. Bindapur, Delhi on the ground that the parties have amicably settled their disputes.
2. The present FIR was lodged against the petitioners at the instance of the complainant/respondent No. 2 through its Director Sh. Amit Garg, wherein it was stated that petitioner No. 1 was employed with the company about 5 years back as an accountant. In furtherance of trust reposed in him, he was conferred more authority over time which was exploited. It was further stated that petitioner No. 1 stole and destroyed important documents and details of the company, changed passwords that blocked others' access to data, issued unauthorised cheques in the names of fictitious persons and demanded extortion money for granting back access. In connivance with petitioner No. 2 and one Daoud Khan, petitioner No. 1 is also stated to have committed forgery and cheated the company by misappropriating funds.
3. Learned APP for the State submits that the charge sheet has been filed in the present case and the present petitioners are the only accused persons and respondent No. 2 is the only complainant/victim.
4. Learned counsels for the parties submit that the parties have entered into a settlement vide Memorandum of Understanding-cum-Settlement Deed dated 23.03.2021 (Annexure P-2). In terms of the settlement, respondent No. 2 is now left with no claim whatsoever against the petitioners.
5. Respondent No. 2, who has joined the V.C. proceedings, is identified by his counsel as well as by the Investigating Officer/Inspector Satyavir Janaula, Police Station Bindapur, who has also joined the V.C. proceedings.
6. Respondent No. 2 states that he has entered into the aforesaid settlement with the petitioners out of his own free will, volition and without any force or coercion. He further states that he has no objection if the present FIR and consequent proceedings are quashed.
7. Learned counsels for the parties submit that no other proceedings are pending between the parties.
8. The parties shall remain bound by the statements made in Court today.
9. In Parbatbhai Aahir and Others v. State of Gujarat and Another reported as (2017) 9 SCC 641, it has been held as under:-
"16. The broad principles which emerge from the precedents on the subject, may be summarised in the following propositions:
xxx 16.7. As distinguished from serious offences, there may be criminal cases which have an overwhelming or predominant element of a civil dispute. They stand on a distinct footing in so far as the exercise of the inherent power to quash is concerned; 16.8. Criminal cases involving offences which arise from commercial, financial, mercantile, partnership or similar transactions with an essentially civil flavour may in appropriate situations fall for quashing where parties have settled the dispute;
16.9. In such a case, the High Court may quash the criminal proceeding if in view of the compromise between the disputants, the possibility of a conviction is remote and the continuation of a criminal proceeding would cause oppression and prejudice;
and..."
10. Similarly, in State of Madhya Pradesh v. Laxmi Narayan and Others reported as (2019) 5 SCC 688, it has been held as under:-
"15. Considering the law on the point and the other decisions of this Court on the point, referred to hereinabove, it is observed and held as under:
15.1. That the power conferred Under Section 482 of the Code to quash the criminal proceedings for the non-compoundable offences Under Section 320 of the Code can be exercised having overwhelmingly and predominantly the civil character, particularly those arising out of commercial transactions or arising out of matrimonial relationship or family disputes and when the parties have resolved the entire dispute amongst themselves;"
11. In view of the above facts and since no useful purpose will be served in continuance of the proceedings, it is directed that the aforesaid FIR and the consequent proceedings arising therefrom are hereby quashed, subject to payment of composite costs of Rs.10,000/- by the petitioners with the Delhi State Legal Services Authority within a period of one week from today.
12. Receipt evidencing deposit of costs be filed in the Registry as well as with the Investigating Officer.
13. With the above directions, the petition is disposed of.
14. The Registry shall list the matter before this Court in case receipt of costs to be paid by the petitioners is not filed within the stipulated time period.
MANOJ KUMAR OHRI, J OCTOBER 1, 2021 p'ma Click here to check corrigendum, if any