Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
S.S.Shinde, Manish Pitale, JJ.
Yashwinder Singh Ghura - Appellant
Versus
State Of Maharashtra - Respondent
Criminal Writ Petition No. 2001 of 2018
Decided On : 25-02-2021
Quashing of FIR - Private and Commercial Dispute - Indian Penal Code - Sections 420, 409 read with Section 34 - Memorandum of Understanding - Compromise between the parties - Costs towards a noble cause
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought quashing of FIR No.453 of 2016 for offences under Sections 420, 409 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, claiming an amicable settlement with the complainant and readiness to deposit an amount in court.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the dispute between the parties was of a private and commercial nature, and the complainant did not wish to pursue the case further after reaching a settlement. The court allowed the petition and ordered the petitioner to deposit an amount towards costs for a noble cause.
Issues: Quashing of FIR, Settlement between parties, Criminal antecedents of the petitioner
Ratio Decidendi: The court applied the principle that in cases of overwhelmingly civil nature, where parties have resolved their dispute, and the possibility of conviction is remote, the criminal proceedings may be quashed. The court also emphasized the need for the petitioner to deposit costs towards a noble cause as part of the settlement.
Final Decision: The writ petition was allowed, and the FIR was quashed for both the petitioner and the other accused person, subject to the petitioner depositing the specified amount towards costs within the stipulated period.
JUDGMENT
MANISH PITALE,J. - By this writ petition, the petitioner has sought quashing of First Information Report ("FIR") No.453 of 2016 registered at Warje- Malwadi Police Station for offences under Sections 420, 409 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code ("IPC").
2. There are two accused persons in the said FIR. It was claimed by respondent No.2 (original complainant) that the petitioner and the said other accused person had allegedly duped him, which led to registration of FIR.
3. While filing the writ petition, it was brought to the notice of this court that the petitioner and respondent No.2 had amicably settled their dispute and that the petitioner was ready to deposit an amount of Rs.29,50,000/- in the Registry of this court in terms of the settlement between the parties and that, such amount could be withdrawn by respondent No.2.
4. On 19/12/2019, we recorded the fact that the petitioner and respondent No.2 were jointly requesting for quashing of the FIR. The petition stood adjourned at the request of respondent No.1-State to make a statement about the antecedents of the parties. Prior to the said order, respondent No.2 had placed on record an affidavit in reply stating that the petitioner and respondent No.2 had entered into a Memorandum of Understanding dated 18/01/2018 in pursuance of which, the dispute was amicably settled. It was further stated in the affidavit that the petitioner had deposited the aforesaid amount of Rs.29,50,000/- in this court and that he had also paid Rs.7,00,000/- by Demand Draft to respondent No.2.
5. Thereafter, respondent No.2 filed an additional affidavit in reply dated 19/12/2019 stating that he not only had no objection to quashing of the FIR qua the petitioner but, he also had no objection for quashing of the FIR against the other accused person i.e. Amit Gadekar. The relevant paragraphs of the said additional affidavit in reply read as follows:
"2. I say that I and the Petitioner herein have entered into the Memorandum of Understanding ('MOU' for short) on 18th January, 2018. I say that I confirm that the said MOU is signed by me and in light of this MOU, we have arrived at an amicable settlement.
3. I say that the Petitioner herein has deposited an amount of Rs.29,50,000/- in the registry of the Hon'ble High Court and he has also paid an amount of Rs.7 Lakhs to me by way of a Demand Draft.
4. I say that in light of the MOU, which is arrived at by way of understanding between myself and the Petitioner herein dated 18th January, 2018, I have no objection for quashing of the FIR bearing C.R.
No.453/2106 registered with the Warjemalwadi Police Station, Pune, qua the Petitioner.
5. I say that also I have no objection for quashing of the FIR bearing C.R. No.453/2016 registered with the Warjemalwadi Police Station, Pune, against the Petitioner as well as shri Amit Gadekar.
6. In so far as the co-accused Shri Amit Gadekar is concerned I have given my consent for quashing the FIR bearing C.R. No.453/2016 registered with the Warjemalwadi Police Station, Pune, against Shri Amit Gadekar without prejudice to my rights regarding criminal proceedings in S.C.C. No.411976 of 2015 which is pending before the Honorable 32nd JOINT CJSD AND ADDL.CJM, PUNE filed under section 138 of Negotiable instrument Act against co-accused Shri. Amit Gadekar.
7. I say that I do not wish to pursue the FIR bearing C.R. No.453/2016 registered with the Warjemalwadi Police Station, Pune, against the present Petitioner since both parties have now arrived at amicable settlement and it is in these circumstances that I do not wish to prosecute the present Petitioner."
6. On 17/02/2021, when the petition was called out for hearing, respondent No.2 was personally present in the court. We interacted with him and he stated that he had filed the affidavit in reply and additional affidavit in reply voluntarily without any coercion and that he had no objection to the FIR being quashed against the petitioner as well as the afore
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
