ORDER :

1. Rule. Mr. Hardik Mehta, learned APP waives service of Rule on behalf of the respondent – State and Mr. Krunal G. Patel, learned advocate waives service of Rule on behalf of the respondent no.2.

2. This application has been filed under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing and setting aside the FIR bearing CR No.I-9/2019 registered with Navrangpura Police Station, Ahmedabad City for offences punishable under Sections 406, 420 and 114 of the IPC.

3. The complainant – Parvez Ibrahimbhai Kazi was working as Conductor in the Company known as Cadila Pharmaceuticals Ltd. Applicant no.1 is a President of the Union, while the applicant no.2 is Secretary who had filed Reference IT no.3 of 2008 praying for increasing the wages of the labourers. The case came to be disposed of with an increment of Rs.1,500/- to the wagers. The amount which has been received by a Reference was given through cheque in the bank account of the complainant and 53 individuals. It is alleged by the complainant that out of the said amount, Rs.6 lacs per individual was collected by the Union towards legal expenses and the complainant, thus, states that the amount collected was by defrauding the complainant and others and therefore, Sections 406 and 420 of the IPC would be attracted in the matter.

4. Mr. Virat Popat, learned advocate for the applicants submits that the Union had filed several cases before this Court, Labour Court and Industrial Tribunal and in all about 199 litigations were preferred by the Union. The applicants, as Union leaders, had worked day in and day out to ensure that the workmen get benefit as claimants. They worked as labourers from the year 2008 to 2015, which thereafter resulted in compromise and each labourer was granted Rs.15 lacs towards full and final settlement.

4.1 Mr. Popat submits that some of the claimants had accepted the amount and had given the affidavits stating that they are not desirous to proceed with the litigations. Mr. Popat states that necessary MOU/affidavits were executed which show that the amount was accepted without any dispute while 5 of the the claimants had not come forward to receive the cheque and thus, the cheques were returned back to the Company. Mr. Popat further submits that the amount received by the individuals had gone to their bank account, which could be verified through the bank statement of the Company. Mr. Popat submits that the terms of full and final settlement was to the effect that the dues were finally settled and the workmen were to submit their resignation in their own handwriting. Mr. Popat submits that the present complainant too had resigned and there should not be any dispute as the money has been accepted by each of them which becomes apparent from the communication of the Company made to the Labour Welfare Department and further those claimants who have not accepted the cheques were returned back to the Company which itself proves the bonafide of the Union Officers and thus, submits that the element of Sections 406 and 420 of the IPC would not be attracted.

4.2 Mr. Popat states that 50 affidavits have been filed on record of the settlement and for rest of the three, Mr. Popat submitted that one has expired after filing of the affidavit, one is in jail while the other one is present today.

4.3 Mr. Popat further submits that the parties have settled the dispute amicably outside the Court and that there remains no grievance between them. Therefore, in the larger interest of the society, the impugned FIR may be quashed and set aside.

5. The complainant has appeared yesterday and even today and has filed an affidavit stating that he and other 53 were serving with the Transport Division of Green Channel Travel Services and the applicants, as Presidents of the Union and Chairpersons of the Negotiating Committee with the Companies, have represented their case of the workers for the benefits, rights and other demands from time to time. The complainant joined as Bus Co