Hemaxiba Aniruddhsinh Dodiya And Ors vs. State Of Maharashtra And Anr

Facts

The Petitioners, who are businessmen, sought to quash a First Information Report (FIR) registered against them at Nerul Police Station. The FIR was filed by Respondent No. 2, also a businessman, for offenses under Sections 406, 420, and 506 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. The dispute arose from an agreement for the sale of a Horizontal Directional Drilling (HDD) machine for Rs. 30,00,000/- plus Goods and Services Tax. A disagreement concerning the payment of the agreed consideration led to the FIR. During the investigation, the parties decided to settle their dispute amicably. They executed Consent Terms and a Consent Affidavit was filed by the Complainant. As per the settlement, the Petitioners handed over a Demand Draft of Rs. 20,00,000/- to the Complainant's company.

Held

The Court held that the FIR should be quashed and set aside. The primary issue was whether the FIR, filed for offenses under the Indian Penal Code, could be quashed based on an amicable settlement between the parties. The Court noted that the parties had entered into Consent Terms and the Complainant had filed a Consent Affidavit expressing his desire to withdraw allegations and not pursue prosecution due to the settlement. The Complainant acknowledged receipt of Rs. 20,00,000/- as part of the settlement. The Court found no impediment to quashing the FIR under these circumstances. The Court allowed the petition, quashing the FIR, subject to the Petitioners paying Rs. 10,000/- each to the Advocates’ Association of Western India Generation Next Fund within four weeks. The Court also stipulated that if the cost is not paid, the petition would stand revived.

Key Issues

1. Whether the FIR registered under Sections 406, 420, and 506 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, should be quashed and set aside in light of the amicable settlement between the parties? Petitioner's Argument: The Petitioners argued that since the parties have amicably resolved their dispute through Consent Terms and the Complainant has expressed his wish to withdraw the allegations and not pursue prosecution, the FIR should be quashed. They relied on the Consent Affidavit filed by the Complainant. Revenue/State's Argument: The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the Respondent No. 1-State. However, the Respondent No. 2 (Complainant) has filed a Consent Affidavit stating his no objection to quashing the FIR due to the settlement.