Full Text
Translation output
L
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
CRL.M.C. 3935/2011
KULDEEPAK GUPTA & ANR.
Petitioner
Through Mr. Rahul Tyagi, Adv.
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
CRL.M.C. 3935/2011
KULDEEPAK GUPTA & ANR.
Petitioner
Through Mr. Rahul Tyagi, Adv.
VERSUS
STATE & ANR.
Respondent
Through Mr.Navin Sharma, APP for State.
Mr. AtuI Guleria for R-2 And
Respondent
Through Mr.Navin Sharma, APP for State.
Mr. AtuI Guleria for R-2 And
CRL.M.C. 3945/2011
ANILMITTAL
Petitioner
Through Mr. Atul Guleria, Adv.
ANILMITTAL
Petitioner
Through Mr. Atul Guleria, Adv.
VERSUS
STATE & ANR.
Respondent
Through Mr. Navin Sharma, APP for State.
Mr. Rahul Tyagi for R-2.
S.I. Ichha Ram.
Inspector Manoj Kr. Mishra
Respondent
Through Mr. Navin Sharma, APP for State.
Mr. Rahul Tyagi for R-2.
S.I. Ichha Ram.
Inspector Manoj Kr. Mishra
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH GAMBHIR 2013:DHC:6891 n
26.02.2013 These two petitions have been preferred by the petitioners seeking quashing oftwo separate FIRs. Crl. M.C. No. 3935/2011 has been filed by the petitioners who are accused in FIR No. 184/2011 registered under Sections 420/468/471/120-B IPG at P.S. New Friends
Colony and Crl.M.C. No. 3945/2011 has been filed by the petitioner who is accused in FIR No. 238/09, registered under Section 66 of I.T Act at
P.S. EOW, Delhi.
Both the parties are present along with their respective counsels. They are duly identified by their respective counsels.
Counsels for the parties submit that both the parties have amicably resolved their disputes in terms of the agreement dated
4.11.2011. Counsels further submit that in terms of the settlement arrived at between the parties, they have agreed to withdraw all the respective cases filed by them against each other and seek quashing ofthepresent
FIRs. Counsels further submit that in terms of the said settlement the parties have finally settled all their disputes and now no dispute of any nature survives between them.
Mr. Navin Sharma, APP for the State opposes the quashing of the FIR No. 184/2011 in Crl. M.C. 3935/2011. Counsel submits that there are serious allegations of forgery and cheating against the petitioners, Kuldeepak Gupta and Kamal Rana, as these petitioners are alleged to have availed the loan facility based on the forged documents.
Counsel also submits that there has been misuse and abuse of the State machinery because of involvement of these petitioners in the said criminal case.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties.
Since the disputes between the parties have been amicably settled, I am of the view that no useful purpose would be served in keeping the said FIRs alive any further against the petitioners. Consequently, the
FIR No. 184/2011 registered under Sections 420,468, 471,120-B IPC at
P.S. New Friends Colony, FIR No. 238/09, registered under Section 66 of
I.T Act at P.S. EOW, Delhi and the criminal proceedings arising therefrom are quashed subject to deposit of an amount of Rs.50,000/- by each petitioner in Crl. M.C. No. 3935/2011 and Rs. 25,000/- by the petitioner in Crl.M.C. No. 3945/2011 with Delhi High Court Bar Association
Lawyers' Social Security and Welfare Fund within a period of two weeks from the date of this order.
The petition stands disposed of accordingly.
KAILASH GAMBHIR, J FEBRUARY 26, 2013 J'
26.02.2013 These two petitions have been preferred by the petitioners seeking quashing oftwo separate FIRs. Crl. M.C. No. 3935/2011 has been filed by the petitioners who are accused in FIR No. 184/2011 registered under Sections 420/468/471/120-B IPG at P.S. New Friends
Colony and Crl.M.C. No. 3945/2011 has been filed by the petitioner who is accused in FIR No. 238/09, registered under Section 66 of I.T Act at
P.S. EOW, Delhi.
Both the parties are present along with their respective counsels. They are duly identified by their respective counsels.
Counsels for the parties submit that both the parties have amicably resolved their disputes in terms of the agreement dated
4.11.2011. Counsels further submit that in terms of the settlement arrived at between the parties, they have agreed to withdraw all the respective cases filed by them against each other and seek quashing ofthepresent
FIRs. Counsels further submit that in terms of the said settlement the parties have finally settled all their disputes and now no dispute of any nature survives between them.
Mr. Navin Sharma, APP for the State opposes the quashing of the FIR No. 184/2011 in Crl. M.C. 3935/2011. Counsel submits that there are serious allegations of forgery and cheating against the petitioners, Kuldeepak Gupta and Kamal Rana, as these petitioners are alleged to have availed the loan facility based on the forged documents.
Counsel also submits that there has been misuse and abuse of the State machinery because of involvement of these petitioners in the said criminal case.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties.
Since the disputes between the parties have been amicably settled, I am of the view that no useful purpose would be served in keeping the said FIRs alive any further against the petitioners. Consequently, the
FIR No. 184/2011 registered under Sections 420,468, 471,120-B IPC at
P.S. New Friends Colony, FIR No. 238/09, registered under Section 66 of
I.T Act at P.S. EOW, Delhi and the criminal proceedings arising therefrom are quashed subject to deposit of an amount of Rs.50,000/- by each petitioner in Crl. M.C. No. 3935/2011 and Rs. 25,000/- by the petitioner in Crl.M.C. No. 3945/2011 with Delhi High Court Bar Association
Lawyers' Social Security and Welfare Fund within a period of two weeks from the date of this order.
The petition stands disposed of accordingly.
KAILASH GAMBHIR, J FEBRUARY 26, 2013 J'
JUDGMENT