The main legal point established in the judgment is that the dispute was civil in nature and had been given the color of criminality. The court also found that no case under Section 423 read with Section 120-B IPC was made out against the respondents.

JUDGEMENT

Talwant Singh, J.

1. The petitions mentioned above had challenged a common order dated 01.12.2017 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, South District in Criminal Revision Petition Nos. 8451/2016 and 8442/2016. These petitions were disposed of by this Court on 24.02.2023. Thereafter the applicant/petitioner moved Crl.M.A.12586/2023 in Crl.M.C.1900/2018 and Crl.M.A. 12587/2023 in Crl.M.C. 1923/2018 praying as follows:

"It is, therefore, humbly prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to:

A. Allow the present Application for modification, and modify Order dt. 24.02.2023 passed by this Hon'ble Court in terms of para 6 of the present Application;

B. Pass such other order and/or directions as this Hon'ble Court may kindly deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case in favour of the petitioner".

1.1 In brief history, the petitioner/applicants had mentioned as under:

"1. The humble petitioner had filed Criminal Misc. Petitions being CRL. MC. 1900/2018 and CRL. MC. 1923/2018 against the composite Judgment and Order dt. 01.12.2017 passed by Learned Special Judge (PC Act) CBI-01, South), Saket Courts, New Delhi in Criminal Revision No. 8451 of 2016 and Criminal Revision No. 8442 of 2016, whereby the Revisional Court dismissed Revision Petition No. 8451/2016 filed by the Petitioner challenging the non-summoning of respondents Dinesh Kumar Garg and Smt. Chitra Garg, and also, allowed Revision Petition No. 8442/2016 filed by respondents Anup Diwan and Dr. Arun Srivastava, setting aside their summoning order.

2. The said two petitions were disposed of by a common order dated 24.02.2023, certified copy whereof is annexed herewith and marked as Annexure-A/1. In Order dt. 24.02.2023, it was observed by the Hon'ble Court as under:

" "Para 1. Learned counsel for the petitioner in both the petitions, after some lengthy arguments, submits under instructions of the petitioner, who is present in person, that he does not intend to press the present petitions and same may be allowed to be dismissed as withdrawn, with liberty to initiate proceedings under Section 423 IPC against the respondents.

Para 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the respondents are liable to be prosecuted under Section 423 IPC but this Section was never been invoked before the learned Metropolitan Magistrate or before the Court of learned Sessions Judge, where the revision petitions were pending and he is raising this point for the first time before this Court."

"Para 8. Oder dated 01.12.2017 passed by Learned Special Judge (P.C. Act) CBI-01, South, Saket Court New Delhi in Crl. Rev. P. 8451/2016 and Crl. Rev. P. No.8442/2016 has become final, as challenge to the same has been withdrawn."

"Para 9. Leave and liberty is granted to the petitioners to pursue the civil suit already pending before this Court, and also to take any steps under Section 423 IPC, if not already agitated before learned Metropolitan Magistrate or learned Additional Sessions Judge, at any point of time. It is made clear that this Court has neither condoned the delay nor has expressed any opinion about maintainability of any proceeding's u/s 423 IPC, for which leave has been sought. Learned Trial Court has to take call regarding maintainability of any such petition, as and when filed, keeping in view the fact as to whether any similar ground was already raised or not in any proceedings as well as the ground of limitation."

1.2 As per the petitioner, the correct facts had not been appreciated in the right context as no fresh proceedings under Section 423 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as `IPC') have to be initiated, as learned Magistrate as well as learned Sessions Judge had failed to consider the applicability of Section 423 IPC on the facts of the case, when the same was pending before them. In fact, the petitioner had invoked Section 423 IPC at both the stages, i.e., before the learned Trial Court as well as the learned Se