Milind Jagannath Rane vs. State Of Maharashtra And Ors.

Held

The Court held that the Petition is allowed in terms of prayer clauses (a), (b), and (c). The FIR No.65/2023 registered with Sion Police Station, Mumbai, for offences punishable under Sections 406, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, is hereby quashed. The Court reasoned that the matter had been amicably settled between the parties, and the allegations in the complaint were personal in nature. In light of the settlement and the principle laid down by the Apex Court in Narinder Singh v/s. State of Punjab, the Court found that no purpose would be served by keeping the criminal proceedings pending, as it would only burden the already overburdened Criminal Courts. However, to discourage the misuse of the judicial mechanism for settling personal disputes, the Court imposed costs. The Petitioner was directed to pay costs of Rs. 50,000/- to Tata Memorial Hospital, Mumbai, within two weeks. The bank accounts were to be defreezed, and the Petitioner's wife's mobile phone was to be returned as per the prayer clauses.

Facts

The Petitioner, Milind Jagannath Rane, filed a writ petition seeking to quash an FIR registered against him for offences under the Indian Penal Code. The FIR was lodged by Respondent No. 2, Mana Rasik Shah, alleging that the Petitioner misrepresented a contract with the Municipal Corporation for a bio-gas plant and induced her to invest Rs. 2,70,00,000/-. The Petitioner allegedly claimed a profit of Rs. 9,00,000/- per month. The Respondent No. 2 learned that no contract was awarded, no land was allotted, and no machinery was delivered. The invested money was allegedly transferred to the Petitioner's company, Siddhi Waste to Green Pvt. Ltd., after deducting GST, and then to the Petitioner's personal account. Invoices were claimed to be forged. The Petitioner also sought to defreeze bank accounts and return his wife's mobile phone. The parties subsequently reported an amicable settlement, with the Petitioner agreeing to repay Rs. 1,85,00,000/- to Respondent No. 2, adjusting Rs. 23,00,000/- due to Siddhi Waste to Green Pvt. Ltd.

Key Issues

1. Whether the FIR No.65/2023 registered with Sion Police Station, Mumbai, for offences under Sections 406, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code should be quashed, considering the amicable settlement between the parties and the repayment of Rs. 1,85,00,000/- by the Petitioner to Respondent No. 2. This issue turns on the court's power to quash criminal proceedings in cases of settlement, particularly under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, and Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Petitioner's Argument: The Petitioner argued that since a full and final settlement has been reached, and the entire amount has been repaid, no purpose would be served by continuing the criminal proceedings. He relied on the principle that criminal proceedings can be quashed if the allegations are personal in nature and the dispute has been amicably resolved, citing precedents like Narinder Singh v/s. State of Punjab. Revenue/State's Argument: The State did not appear to contest the quashing of the FIR, given the settlement and the complainant's no-objection. The judgment does not record any specific argument from the State against the quashing.