Delhi High Court - Orders
Raj Kumar Midha & Ors vs State Government Of Nct Of Delhi & Anr on 21 February, 2022
Author: Mukta Gupta
Bench: Mukta Gupta
$~24
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CRL.M.C. 2363/2021
RAJ KUMAR MIDHA & ORS. ..... Petitioners
Represented by: Mr.Naman Joshi, Mr.Guneet
Sidhu and Mr.Yuvraj Francis,
Advocates with petitioner Nos.1, 2
and 3 present through video
conferencing.
versus
STATE GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF
DELHI & ANR. ..... Respondent
Represented by: Mr.Ravi Nayak, APP for State
with SI Jitender, PS C.R. Park.
Ms.Praveen Rawal, Advocate for
respondent No.2 with Respondent
No.2 present through video
conferencing.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA
ORDER
% 21.02.2022 The hearing has been conducted through Video Conferencing.
1. By the present petition, petitioners seek quashing FIR No.46/2016 under Sections 406/420/467/468/471/120B/34 IPC, registered at PS Chittaranjan Park, Delhi on the complaint of respondent No.2 and the proceedings pursuant thereto on the ground that the parties have settled the matter.
2. Learned APP for the State on instructions submits that in the above-noted FIR besides the four petitioners, one Raghubir Singh @ Channi was also named as an accused who has since passed away, which Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA CRL.M.C. 2363/2021 Page 1 of 4 Signing Date:22.02.2022 23:38:29 fact has been verified and noted in the Status report. Thus the four petitioners are the only accused and the respondent No.2 the only complainant/victim and no other person is involved.
3. In the above-noted FIR respondent No.2 alleged that as the complainant was suffering from hip joint fracture for the last many months and he had good relations with the petitioner No.1 for the past twenty years, he had given some signatures on the blank paper to the petitioner No.1 for the purpose of depositing the house tax etc. and also handed over his voter ID card and PAN card. The property bearing No.E-381, Greater Kailash -2, New Delhi was a joint property of the complainant along with his elder brother and two sisters. One of the sister namely Neeta Bogal filed a civil suit being CS (OS) No.2639/2013 before this Court seeking her share in the property bearing No. E-381, Greater Kailash -2, New Delhi wherein the respondent No.2 had given an undertaking on 18th December, 2014 that the suit property will not be alienated or parted with the possession. Further the brothers and sisters of the complainant were also not willing to sell the property. Since the complainant was in need of money due to his ill health and his matrimonial dispute with his wife before Chandigarh Court, he took a loan from petitioner No.1 for a sum of ₹2 lakhs out of which ₹1.90 lakhs was received through a cheque and an amount of ₹6,000/- was received through RTGS out of which the interest amount was deducted. Later on 25th September, 2015 the petitioner Nos.3 and 4 came to his property and threatened in presence of his tenant that they had purchased the property. The complainant also received a legal notice on behalf of the company of petitioner No.2 claiming that the complainant had agreed to sell his Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA CRL.M.C. 2363/2021 Page 2 of 4 Signing Date:22.02.2022 23:38:29 proportionate undivided share in the suit property mentioned above and an advance in this regard has been taken. The accused also filed a civil suit for specific performance. The document, that is, the Agreement to Sell and Purchase dated 7th May, 2015 was sent to FSL, though the writing could not he matched however, the thumb impression thereon matched. It is thus the case of the complainant that he was cheated documents were created including the Agreement to Sell in respect of the undivided share of the complainant in the suit property.
4. During the pendency of the FIR, parties entered into a settlement dated 13th September, 2021, copy whereof is annexed as Annexure-B to the present petition. In terms of the settlement, the petitioners have withdrawn the civil suit as noted above and respondent No.2 does not wish to pursue the above noted FIR and the proceedings pursuant thereto.
5. Respondent No.2/complainant is present through video conferencing and is identified by the learned counsel and the Investigating Officer. He states that he has settled the matter with the petitioners who have withdrawn their civil suit and thus he does not wish to pursue the above-noted FIR and the proceedings pursuant thereto and undertakes to abide by the terms of settlement arrived at between the parties.
6. Petitioner Nos.1, 2 and 3 are present through video conferencing and are identified by the learned counsel. Petitioner No.4 is stated to be hospitalised and is in the ICU since 12th February, 2022, thus is not in a position to attend the proceedings. Petitioner No.4 is therefore exempted from joining the proceedings. Petitioner Nos.1, 2 and 3 affirm the Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA CRL.M.C. 2363/2021 Page 3 of 4 Signing Date:22.02.2022 23:38:29 statement of respondent No.2 and undertake to abide by the terms of settlement.
7. In view of the fact that the parties have amicably resolved their differences of their own free will, volition and without any coercion and no useful purpose will be served in continuance of the proceedings, it would be in the interest of justice to quash the abovementioned FIR and the proceedings pursuant thereto. There is no legal impediment in quashing the FIR in question.
8. Consequently, FIR No.46/2016 under Sections 406/420/467/468/ 471/120B/34 IPC, registered at PS Chittaranjan Park, Delhi and proceedings pursuant thereto are hereby quashed qua all the petitioners.
9. Petition is disposed of.
10. Order be uploaded on the website of this Court.
MUKTA GUPTA, J.
FEBRUARY 21, 2022 'vn' Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA CRL.M.C. 2363/2021 Page 4 of 4 Signing Date:22.02.2022 23:38:29