Back
2021 Supreme(Bom) 1570
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT GOA
Revati Mohite Dere, M. S. Jawalkar, JJ.
Sameer Bhat - Appellant
Versus
State Of Goa, Thr. The Public Prosecutor & Ors. - Respondents
Criminal Miscellaneous Application No. 818 of 2021(Filing) In Criminal Writ Petition No. 299 of 2021(Filing)
Decided On : 07-12-2021
Parag Rao, Advocate, Meghana Naik, Advocate, S.G. Bhobe, Advocate, Pravin Faldessai, Advocate, Shivan Desai, Advocate
Settlement agreements can be considered by the court for quashing criminal proceedings if the parties have complied with the terms.
Headnote:
Quashing - Settlement Agreement - The court quashed the FIR, chargesheet, and criminal proceedings against the petitioner and his sister based on the settlement agreement between the parties, directing the release of the petitioner's passport and withdrawal of the lookout notice.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought quashing of FIR, chargesheet, and criminal proceedings based on a settlement agreement with the respondent No.3.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the parties had amicably settled their dispute as per the consent terms and allowed the application for quashing the proceedings.
Issues: The main issue was the quashing of the criminal proceedings against the petitioner and his sister based on the settlement agreement.
Ratio Decidendi: The court considered the settlement agreement and the compliance of the parties with the terms, leading to the decision to quash the proceedings.
Final Decision: The court quashed the FIR, chargesheet, and criminal proceedings against the petitioner and his sister, directing the release of the petitioner's passport and withdrawal of the lookout notice.
JUDGMENT
1. Not on Board. Taken on Board at the request of and by consent of the parties.
2. By this application, the applicant seeks quashing and setting aside of FIR No. 28/2020, chargesheet bearing outward no.5525 and 94 of 2021 dated 22.05.2021 and criminal proceedings pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Pernem, i.e. Criminal Case No. 22 of 2021, as against the petitioner and his sister Neelam Jalla with further directions to the respondent No.2 to release the petitioner's passport forthwith and to withdraw the lookout notice issued against him, in view of the consent terms entered into by and between the petitioner and the respondent No3- Mrs. Jeeva Reddy.
3. Learned Counsel for the applicant submits that during the pendency of the aforesaid petition the parties amicably settled the matter and entered into consent terms which are at page 20 of the aforesaid application.
4. A Perusal of the consent terms, which are at page 20 of the application, shows that the petitioner was to perform certain acts and so was the respondent No.3, as set out therein. As far as the petitioner is concerned, he had undertaken to comply with the terms set out in clause (C) of the said consent terms, and, as far as the respondent No.3-wife was concerned she had undertaken to comply with the terms set out in clause (D) of the said consent terms.
5. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that as far as the undertaking set out in clause (C) by the petitioner is concerned the petitioner has complied with all the terms set out in the said clause. He further submits that as far as clause (E) is concerned, the petitioner has today transferred via RTGS an amount of Rs.11,00,000/- (rupees eleven lakhs) as set out in the consent terms in favour of the respondent No.3. Learned Counsel for the respondent No.3 acknowledges receipt of the said amount. The proof of RTGS transfer is produced. The same is taken on record.
6. Mr. Desai, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.3-wife does not dispute that the petitioner and the respondent No.3 have amicably settled their dispute as set out in the consent terms which are at page 20 of the application. He also does not dispute that the present application has been filed by the petitioner, pursuant to one of the conditions set out in the consent terms, that she will file an affidavit giving her no objection to the quashing of the proceedings qua the petitioner and his sister.
7. In view of the urgency, learned Counsel for the respondent No.3 has produced a scanned copy of the affidavit of respondent No.3 which is affirmed at New Delhi on 27.11.2021. The said scanned copy is taken on record. Learned counsel for the respondent no.3 assures to file the original copy of the affidavit in the registry on or before 13.12.2021.
8. Considering the relations between the party, i.e. the petitioner being the ex-husband of respondent no.3 and Neela Jalla, respondent no.3's sister-in-law, and the settlement arrived at between the parties, there is no impediment if the aforesaid application is allowed.
9. Accordingly, FIR bearing No. 28/2020 alongwith the chargesheet as well as the criminal proceedings No.22/2021, which are pending before the learned JMFC, Pernem, as against the petitioner as well as his sister Neelam Jalla, are quashed and set aside.
10. Accordingly, we direct the respondent No.2 to forthwith release the petitioner's passport on production of an authenticated copy of this order. We also direct the respondent no.2 to forthwith withdraw the lookout notice issued as against the petitioner.
11. The respondent no.2 to inform all authorities, as may be necessary, of the withdrawal of the lookout notice. The same also to be done on production of an authenticated copy of this order. Learned Public Prosecutor also assures to communicate the said order to the respondent No.2 so as to enable the authority to release the petitioner's passport forthwith as well as for withdrawal of the lookout notice i
