Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Dinesh Kumar Sharma, J.
Ravinder Singh - Appellant
Versus
State (NCT of Delhi) - Respondent
Crl.M.C. 2737 of 2019
Decided On : 05-12-2022
The court affirmed that voluntary settlements between parties can lead to the quashing of FIRs when conditions such as compensation are met.
Headnote:(A) Copyright Act, 1957 - Section 63 - Trademarks Act - Sections 103/104 - Indian Penal Code - Sections 420/485/486 - Quashing of FIR - Parties entered into a settlement/MOU, with the petitioner paying Rs.50,000/- as compensation; Court quashed FIR and proceedings, requiring petitioner to deposit Rs.1 lakh with the Prime Minister Relief Fund. (Paras 1, 3, 7)
(B) Settlement of disputes - Settlement was voluntary and not induced by coercion or undue influence as observed by the respondent. (Paras 5, 6)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner sought to quash an FIR registered under various sections concerning copyright and trademark violations, following a settlement reached with the respondent, which included a compensation payment. The legal standing of the authorisation was verified by the State.
Findings of Court:
The FIR and all related proceedings were quashed upon fulfilling the condition of depositing Rs.1 lakh with the Prime Minister Relief Fund.
Issues: The primary issues included the validity of the settlement and the necessity for authorisation verification.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the importance of voluntary settlements and concluded that the FIR should be quashed given the circumstances including the payment made in settlement.
Result: FIR quashed and petition disposed of.
JUDGMENT
Dinesh Kumar Sharma, J. (Oral)
1. The present petition has been filed for quashing FIR No.173/2012 registered at PS Hari Nagar under Section 63 of Copyright Act, 1957, under Sections 103/104 of Trademarks Act and under Sections 420/485/486 IPC.
2. Learned counsel for respondent no.2 states that the parties have entered into a settlement/MOU dated 10.05.2022, which has duly been executed between the parties.
3. In pursuance to the settlement, the petitioner has paid a sum of Rs.50,000/- as compensation for the act alleged in the FIR in full and final settlement of the existing dispute.
4. Vide order dated 03.03.2020, this court directed the State to verify the authorisation in favour of Ms.P.J.Janani. In pursuance to the order, learned APP for the State has furnished a letter dated 23.03.2021 addressed to the Investigation Officer by Mr.Woo Suk Leem, the authorised signatory wherein authorisation in favour of Ms.P.J.Janani has duly been verified.
5. Ms.P.S.Janani/respondent no.2 has stated before this Court that she has entered into a settlement with the petitioner voluntarily without any fear, undue influence or coercion.
6. Learned APP for the State has stated that in the present case, the charge-sheet was filed in the year 2013 and already a burden has been put upon the system.
7. In the totality of these facts and circumstances, FIR No.173/2012 registered at PS Hari Nagar under Section 63 of Copyright Act, 1957, under Sections 103/104 of Trademarks Act and under Sections 420/485/486 IPC along with all other proceedings emanating therefrom is quashed, subject to the petitioner depositing a sum of Rs.1 lakh with the Prime Minister Relief Fund. The receipt of the same be furnished before this Court within four weeks.
8. With the above directions, the petition stands disposed of.
9. List for compliance on 19.01.2023.
