Full Text
Translation output
$-2 HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Date ofDecision: July 17, 2015
Date ofDecision: July 17, 2015
CRL.M.C. 5517/2014
ATUL SARIN & ANR Petitioners
Through: Mr. A.K. Mishra and Mr. Ajay Tiwari, Advocates
ATUL SARIN & ANR Petitioners
Through: Mr. A.K. Mishra and Mr. Ajay Tiwari, Advocates
VERSUS
THE STATE (NCT OF DELHI) & ANR .... Respondents
Through: Mr. Vinod Diwakar, Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent-
State with SI Inder Pal Singh
Through: Mr. Vinod Diwakar, Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent-
State with SI Inder Pal Singh
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR
JUDGMENT
(ORAL)
Quashing of FIR No.122/2009 under Sections 420/468/471 of IPG registered at police station Parliament Street, Delhi is sought by petitioners on the basis of the Memorandum of Understanding (Annexure
P-2) arrived at with respondent No.2.
At the hearing, this petition is strongly opposed by learned
Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent-State, who submits that there are serious allegations of forgery qua petitioners. It is pointed out that apart from respondent No.2, there are three other victims also who were supplied forged Visas by petitioners and the modus operandi of petitioners is to cheat unsuspecting victims by forging documents and so, CRL.M.C. 5517/2014 ~~ Page 1
2015:DHC:11180 the FIR of this case does not deserve to be quashed. Attention of this
Court is drawn by learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent-
State to pertinent observations of the Apex Court in 'Gian Singh Vs. State ofPunjab & Anr.' (2012) 10 SCC 303, which reads as under:-
"58. In respect ofserious offences like murder, rape, dacoity, etc., or other offences of mental depravity under
IPG or offences of moral turpitude under special statutes, like the Prevention of Corruption Act or the offences committed bypublic servants while working in that capacity, the settlement between the offender and the victim can have no legal sanction at all. "
Upon hearing and on perusal of the status report, 1 find that the gravity of the offence is such which dissuades this Court to quash the FIR in question as there are serious allegations of forgery of Visas against petitioners. Consequentially, this petition is dismissed while not commenting upon merits of this case lest it may prejudice petitioners at trial.
(SUNIL GAUR)
JUDGE
JULY 17, 2015 s
Quashing of FIR No.122/2009 under Sections 420/468/471 of IPG registered at police station Parliament Street, Delhi is sought by petitioners on the basis of the Memorandum of Understanding (Annexure
P-2) arrived at with respondent No.2.
At the hearing, this petition is strongly opposed by learned
Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent-State, who submits that there are serious allegations of forgery qua petitioners. It is pointed out that apart from respondent No.2, there are three other victims also who were supplied forged Visas by petitioners and the modus operandi of petitioners is to cheat unsuspecting victims by forging documents and so, CRL.M.C. 5517/2014 ~~ Page 1
2015:DHC:11180 the FIR of this case does not deserve to be quashed. Attention of this
Court is drawn by learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent-
State to pertinent observations of the Apex Court in 'Gian Singh Vs. State ofPunjab & Anr.' (2012) 10 SCC 303, which reads as under:-
"58. In respect ofserious offences like murder, rape, dacoity, etc., or other offences of mental depravity under
IPG or offences of moral turpitude under special statutes, like the Prevention of Corruption Act or the offences committed bypublic servants while working in that capacity, the settlement between the offender and the victim can have no legal sanction at all. "
Upon hearing and on perusal of the status report, 1 find that the gravity of the offence is such which dissuades this Court to quash the FIR in question as there are serious allegations of forgery of Visas against petitioners. Consequentially, this petition is dismissed while not commenting upon merits of this case lest it may prejudice petitioners at trial.
(SUNIL GAUR)
JUDGE
JULY 17, 2015 s
CRL.M.C. 5517/2014 Page 2
2015:DHC:11180
2015:DHC:11180