Full Text
SANJIV BHAKT Petitioner
Through: Mr. S.K. Dubey and Mr. Rajmangal Kumar, Advs.
Through: Mr. G.M. Farooqui, APP for State.
Mr. Vidit Gupta and Mr. Prakash Pandey, Advs. for R-2.
AND.
YOGESH SHARMA Petitioner
Through: Mr. S.K. Dubey and Mr. Rajmangal Kumar, Advs.
Mr. Vidit Gupta and Mr. Prakash Pandey, Advs. for R-2 along with Mr. Vijay Garg, Partner of R-2 in person.
07.02.2018 By this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, petitioners have prayed for setting aside of summoning order dated
16th May, 2005 passed by the Metropolitan Magistrate, Delhi as also the entire proceedings arising out of FIR No.451/2003 under Sections 120-
2018:DHC:9324 B/406/420/467/471 IPC registered at police station Malviya Nagar on the complaint of Mr. Vijay Garg, partner of MIs Puja & Company in respect of the commercial transactions between the MIs Puja & Company and Mis Tri-
X Security Pvt. Ltd. Petitions are directors of MIs Tri-X Security Pvt. Ltd.
Another director, namely, Ashok Chaudhary was also an accused in the FIR besides the petitioners. He was also summoned by the summoning order t dated 16th May, 2005. Ashok Chaudhaiy preferred Cr1. M.C. 3 173/2005 titled Ashok Chaudhry vs. State (GNCT of Delhi) and Ors. in this Court which has been disposed of vide
ORDER
29th Mach, 2016 whereby summoning order and the consequent proceedings emanating therefrom were quashed qua him, for the reasons recorded in the judgment (Annexure
P-2). Mr. Vijay Garg filed a Special Leave Petition No. (Cr1.) 14371/2016 which was dismissed by the Supreme Court vide order dated
9th September, 2016.
During the pendency of the present petition, a compromise has been arrived at between MIs Tri-X and respondent no.2 on
7th December, 2017 vide settlement deed Annexure P-2 to the Cr1. M.C. 643/2018, whereby
Civil as well as Criminal matters regarding the present transactions have
II been settled. A joint application under Order 23 Rule 3 CPC was filed in the court of Additional District Judge, Saket Court, New Delhi and the same has been disposed of vide order dated 7thi December, 2017 by accepting the
Settlement Deed.
Mr. Vijay Garg is present in Court along with his counsel and has been identified by SI Arvind of Economic Offences Wing. Mr. Vijay Garg submits that matter has indeed been settled between the petitioner and MIs
16 Puja & Company voluhtarily. He further states that he is partner of M/s Puja & Company and has signed the Settlement Deed. Affidavit of Mr. Vijay Garg is also on record. Petitioner has paid 3.30 lacs through a demand draft favouring M/s Puja & Company to respondent no.2, a photocopy whereof has been placed on record. Mr. Vijay Garg submits. that M/s Püja & Company has no objection in case the FIR is quashed. Keeping in view the settlement arrived at between M/s Tri-X Security Pvt. Ltd. and M/s Puja & Company voluntarily, in the interest of justice, aforesaid FIR and the consequent proceedings emanating therefrom are quashed. Both the petitions as well as pending applications are disposed of. Dasti. A.K. PATHAK, J. FEBRUARY 07, 2018 LA $35 & 36 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. 4562/2017 SANJIV BHAKT Petitioner Through Mr. Rajmangal Kumár, Adv versus THE STATE GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS Respondent '4 Through Mr. G.M. Farooqui, APP for State. a + CRL.M.C. 643/2018 YOGESH SHARMA Petitioner Through Mr. Rajmangal Kumar, Adv versus Through Mr. G.M. Farooqui, APP for State. CORAM: HON'BLE MR.
JUSTICE A.K. PATHAK ORDER % 23.02.2018 Cr[1] M.A. 3541/2018 in CRL.M.C. 4562/2017 & Cr[1] MA 3547/2018 in CRL.M.C. 643/2018 (both for correction of order dated 07.02.2018) Despite service of advance notice, none has appeared on behalf of respondent no.2. It is submitted that in para 2 at page 3 of order dated 7th February, 2018, the amoUnt of demand draft has inadvertently been typed out as T[3].30 lacs instead of T30 lacs. It is submitted that this typographical error may be rectified. Relevant portion of order dated 7th February, 2018 reads thus:- ".... Petitioner has paid Z[3].30 lacs through a demand draft favouring MIs Puja & Company to respondent no.2, a photocopy whereof has been placed on record...." I have perused the record of both the petitions and it is found that photocopies of demand drafts placed on record, originals whereof were handed over to respondent nos.[2] on 7th February, 2018, mentions an amount of30 lacs. Accordingly, typographical error stands rectified and it is ordered that Z[3].30 lacs mentioned in the order dated 7th February, 2018 will be read as Z30 lacs instead. Both these applications are disposed of. A.K14THAK, J FEBRUARY 239 2018 sm