Back
2017 Supreme(Del) 720
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
MUKTA GUPTA, J.
S.N. Bansal & Anr. - Petitioners
Versus
NCT of Delhi & Ors. - Respondents
CRL.M.C. 790 of 2012 & Crl. M.A. No. 2765 of 2012 (Stay)
Decided On : 01-03-2017
For the Petitioners: Mr. Dinesh Priani
For the Respondents: Mr. Ravi Nayak
The main legal principle established is that settlements reached through mediation should be upheld and treated as solemn, and once parties have settled their disputes, the settlement should be given full effect.
Headnote:
Settlement - Quashing of FIR - Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 - Section 138 - 138, 142 - 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners sought quashing of FIR No. 1111/1998 under Sections 420/467/468/471 IPC registered at PS Kalkaji, Delhi and the proceedings pursuant thereto on the ground that the parties have settled the matter.
Finding of the Court:
The respondent No.2 had filed a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, and a settlement was reached between the parties. The respondent No.2 claimed that the settlement was made under duress, but the court found that it was due to his financial circumstances and not under duress from the petitioners or the Court.
Issues: The main issue was whether the settlement between the parties should be upheld and whether the FIR and proceedings should be quashed.
Ratio Decidendi: The court referred to previous judgments emphasizing the importance of upholding settlements reached through mediation and observed that once parties have settled their disputes, the settlement should be treated as solemn and given full effect.
Final Decision: The court quashed FIR No. 1111/1998 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC and the proceedings pursuant thereto.
Mukta Gupta, J.
1. Amended memo of parties is taken on record.
2. By the present petition the two petitioners S.N. Bansal and G.J. Varadarajan seek quashing of FIR No. 1111/1998 under Sections 420/467/468/471 IPC registered at PS Kalkaji, Delhi and the proceedings pursuant thereto on the ground that the parties have settled the matter.
3. A perusal of the record would reveal that the respondent No.2 Rakesh Kapoor filed a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (in short the ‘NI Act’) wherein S.N. Bansal, petitioner No.1 was convicted. The conviction was upheld by this Court and S.N. Bansal thereafter approached the Hon’ble Supreme Court by filing special leave petition being SLP (Crl.) No.5036/2004. The SLP was dismissed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court on 15th October, 2004. After the SLP (Crl.) No.5036/2004 was dismissed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, the parties entered into a settlement whereafter another special leave petition being SLP (Crl.) No.331/2005 was filed before the Hon’ble Supreme Court. A joint memo of compromise between the respondent No.2/complainant Rakesh Kapoor and S.N. Bansal was entered into duly signed by Rakesh Kapoor and S.N. Bansal which was placed on record before the Hon’ble Supreme Court.
4. Contents of joint memo of compromise filed on 31st January, 2005 before the Hon’ble Supreme Court are as under:-
“IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION SPECIAL LEAVE PETITON (CRL.) NO.331 OF 2005
IN THE MATTER OF:
Rakesh Kapoor - Petitioner/Complainant
Versus
S.N. Bansal & Anr. - Respondents/Accused
JOINT MEMO OF COMPROMISE BETWEEN THE COMPLAINANT RAKESH KAPOOR AND THE ACCUSED S.N. BANSAL PURSUANT TO THE DIRECTIONS OF THE HON’BLE SUPREME COURT BY ORDER DATED 28.1.2005.
1. That the complainant Rakesh Kapoor and the accused S.N. Bansal have arrived at a settlement whereby the accused S.N. Bansal has paid certain amount and also a post-dated cheque to the complainant Rakesh Kapoor which was reported to the Hon’ble Supreme Court at the time of hearing of the Special Leave Petition on 28.1.2005. The parties made a joint prayer for permission to compound the offence for which the accused has been convicted under Section 138 read with Section 142 of the Negotiable Instrument Act. The Hon’ble Court directed the parties to file a joint Memo of Compromise supported by the affidavits of both the parties. Hence this Joint Memo of Compromise.
2. That the Complainant Rakesh Kapoor has received a certain amount and also a post-dated cheque for Rs.7 lakhs from the accused S.N. Bansal towards the full and final settlement of all his claims against S.N. Bansal.
3. That no amount is due from S.N. Bansal and the Complainant is willing to compound the offence of which S.N. Bansal has been convicted by the Court of Addl. Sessions Judge by judgment dated 25.10.2002 which was confirmed by this Hon’ble Court by the dismissal of Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No. 5036 of 2004 on 15.10.2004.
4. That the accused S.N. Bansal, in addition to the amounts already paid to the Complainant has issued a post –dated cheque bearing the date 1.9.2005 for an amount of Rs.7 lakhs in favour of the Complainant towards the said full and final settlement.
5. That the accused S.N. Bansal solemnly undertake to this Hon’ble Court that the said post-dated cheque of Rs.7 lakhs shall be honoured on its due date.
6. That the Complainant has no objection in receiving the balance amount by the said post dated cheque of Rs.7 lakhs, in view of the undertaking of the accused to this Hon’ble Court.
7. That there are no criminal or civil cases instituted by Rakesh Kapoor pending before any court and if any such case is brought to the notice of Rakesh Kapoor, the same shall be withdrawn by making an appropriate application before the concerned Court.
8. That in view of the amicable settlement between Rakesh Kapoor and S.N. Bansal, both parties are making a joint prayer before this Hon’ble Court to permit them to compound the o
