Full Text
Translation output
g
#12
L6.L2.2QTO
Present: Mr.Raman Gandhi, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr.Anindya Malhotra, Advocate for respondent/CBl'
Mr.S.A.Khan, Advocate for respondent No. 2/Central Bank of lndia.
+Crl.M.C.3OO0/2O09
This is a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of complaint arising out of FIR No. RC-DA|-2003-A-0050 dated 10.9.2003 and t- the charge sheet emanating from the same against the petitioners Vijay s) pEnctranda and Shashi Manchanda on the ground that they have settled the matter with the respondent No. 2 bank and paid the entire dues, which was subject matter of this petition.
Learned counsel for the respondent No. 2 submits that he has filed affidavit of Sh. A.K.Midha, Asst. General Manager, Central Bank of India along with the statement of account in the registry, which would show that even the amount as per the settlement has not been paid by the petitioners. Said affidavit is not on record, learned counsel for the rdpondent No. 2 has therefore supplied copy of said affidavit and its annexures for perusal of the court.
From the affidavit'filed by .Sh. A.K.Midha, Asst. General Manager, Central Bank of India, the petitioners have defaulted and full amount as per settlement has not been paid and Rs. 77.2651- lakhs is still due against principal amount despite of the fact that time given to the petitioners for making payment has elapsed. From this, it is apparent that
2010:DHC:9119 s petitioners have not complied with the terms of settlement, therefore, they cannot seek quashing of FIR on the ground of settlement.
Be that as it may, on perusal of record, it transpires that charge sheet on completion of investigation has been filed against the petitioners and others including public servants. Learned Special Judge has found prima facie evidence of involvement of the petitioners in the offence of
' conspiracy to commit offence punishable under Section 13(2) read with
$ection 13(1Xd) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 19BB as well as offences
,t, punishable under Sections 42014671468 & 471 lPC, and directed framing of charges against the petitioners. The act allegedly committed by the petitioners is of serious nature involving abetting abuse of office by a public servant. Since there is a charge of corruption, I do not find it a fit case in which quashing on the basis of settlement can be permitted. lt is
, pertinent to note that the corruption in the country is increasing day by day and it is eating the moral and financial fibre of the country, Such offences punishable under the Prevention of Corruption Act, in my opinion, art required to be dealt with deft hand to deter others who might be nursing such negative thoughts
In view of the above, I do not find any merit in the petition. Petition is dismissed with cost of Rs. 5000/- to be deposited by the petitioners with
Delhi High Court Legal Services Committee.
(AJrT BHARTHOKE)
JUDGE ow o((,u ,"(, - fi'e- cotl
6?;#/ ro(
.- Lo 6"/
DECEMBER 16, 2OLOlat<o l'rt/
2010:DHC:9119
#12
L6.L2.2QTO
Present: Mr.Raman Gandhi, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr.Anindya Malhotra, Advocate for respondent/CBl'
Mr.S.A.Khan, Advocate for respondent No. 2/Central Bank of lndia.
+Crl.M.C.3OO0/2O09
This is a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of complaint arising out of FIR No. RC-DA|-2003-A-0050 dated 10.9.2003 and t- the charge sheet emanating from the same against the petitioners Vijay s) pEnctranda and Shashi Manchanda on the ground that they have settled the matter with the respondent No. 2 bank and paid the entire dues, which was subject matter of this petition.
Learned counsel for the respondent No. 2 submits that he has filed affidavit of Sh. A.K.Midha, Asst. General Manager, Central Bank of India along with the statement of account in the registry, which would show that even the amount as per the settlement has not been paid by the petitioners. Said affidavit is not on record, learned counsel for the rdpondent No. 2 has therefore supplied copy of said affidavit and its annexures for perusal of the court.
From the affidavit'filed by .Sh. A.K.Midha, Asst. General Manager, Central Bank of India, the petitioners have defaulted and full amount as per settlement has not been paid and Rs. 77.2651- lakhs is still due against principal amount despite of the fact that time given to the petitioners for making payment has elapsed. From this, it is apparent that
2010:DHC:9119 s petitioners have not complied with the terms of settlement, therefore, they cannot seek quashing of FIR on the ground of settlement.
Be that as it may, on perusal of record, it transpires that charge sheet on completion of investigation has been filed against the petitioners and others including public servants. Learned Special Judge has found prima facie evidence of involvement of the petitioners in the offence of
' conspiracy to commit offence punishable under Section 13(2) read with
$ection 13(1Xd) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 19BB as well as offences
,t, punishable under Sections 42014671468 & 471 lPC, and directed framing of charges against the petitioners. The act allegedly committed by the petitioners is of serious nature involving abetting abuse of office by a public servant. Since there is a charge of corruption, I do not find it a fit case in which quashing on the basis of settlement can be permitted. lt is
, pertinent to note that the corruption in the country is increasing day by day and it is eating the moral and financial fibre of the country, Such offences punishable under the Prevention of Corruption Act, in my opinion, art required to be dealt with deft hand to deter others who might be nursing such negative thoughts
In view of the above, I do not find any merit in the petition. Petition is dismissed with cost of Rs. 5000/- to be deposited by the petitioners with
Delhi High Court Legal Services Committee.
(AJrT BHARTHOKE)
JUDGE ow o((,u ,"(, - fi'e- cotl
6?;#/ ro(
.- Lo 6"/
DECEMBER 16, 2OLOlat<o l'rt/
2010:DHC:9119
JUDGMENT