Dhirendra Yadav Son Of Shri Ramkumar Yadav vs. State Of Rajasthan

CRLMP/7804/2023HC RajasthanGSTCNR RJHC02102533202307 May 2024Bench: ANIL KUMAR UPMAN3 pages

AI SummaryAllowed

Facts

The petitioner, Dhirendra Yadav, approached the Rajasthan High Court seeking to quash FIR No. 222/2022 registered at Police Station Ashok Nagar, Jaipur City (South) for offences under Sections 420, 406, 467, 468, and 471 of the Indian Penal Code. The petitioner contended that the dispute between him and the complainant, Rahul Grewal, had been amicably resolved through a Settlement Agreement executed on October 3, 2023. The petitioner had also made payments as per the settlement. An affidavit from the complainant confirming the settlement and withdrawal of the FIR was submitted. The Public Prosecutor accepted the factum of compromise. The complainant's counsel admitted the settlement and stated there was no objection to quashing the FIR and consequential proceedings, also agreeing to transfer any GST refund received to the petitioner.

Held

The Court held that the FIR No. 222/2022 and all consequential proceedings are liable to be quashed in view of the compromise arrived at between the parties. The Court considered the affidavit/undertaking sworn by the complainant, which reflected that the parties had resolved their dispute and the complainant wished to withdraw/settle the FIR as per the settlement agreement dated October 3, 2023, and the affidavit/undertaking dated May 7, 2024. The Court found that the case was wholly covered by the principles laid down by the Supreme Court in Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab & Anr. and State of Haryana & Ors. Vs. Choudhary Bhajan Lal & Ors. The Court allowed the criminal misc. petition and quashed and set aside the FIR. It was made clear that both parties shall abide by the terms and conditions of the settlement agreement and the affidavit/undertaking. No specific issue regarding GST provisions was decided as the matter was resolved through compromise.

Key Issues

1. Whether the FIR No. 222/2022, registered under Sections 420, 406, 467, 468, and 471 of the IPC, and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, are liable to be quashed on the basis of a compromise entered into between the petitioner and the complainant? Petitioner's Argument: The petitioner argued that since the dispute between the parties has been amicably resolved through a Settlement Agreement dated October 3, 2023, and the complainant has affirmed this settlement through an affidavit, the FIR and subsequent proceedings should be quashed. They relied on the principle that the inherent powers of the High Court can be exercised to quash proceedings when a compromise has been reached, to secure the ends of justice and prevent abuse of the process of any Court. Revenue/State's Argument: The Public Prosecutor accepted the factum of compromise. The complainant's counsel admitted the factual position and stated that the complainant had no objection to the quashing of the FIR and all subsequent proceedings, provided the parties adhered to the terms of the settlement agreement and undertaking. The complainant's counsel also agreed to transfer any GST refund received to the petitioner.

Sections Cited

Section 420, Section 406, Section 467, Section 468, Section 471

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

[2024:RJ-JP:21700] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 7804/2023 Dhirendra Yadav S/o Shri Ramkumar Yadav, Aged About 42 Years, R/o H.No. 154, Salasar City, C-Block Niwaru Road, Police Station Kardhani, Jaipur At Present R/o Tenant 1301, Building No. 06 X Block, Khargar Sector, 10, New Mumbai (Mh.) ----Petitioner Versus 1. State of Rajasthan through PP 2. Rahul Grewal S/o Shri Rajendra Grewal, R/o Flat No. 257 Tower-9, Hewo-II Sector-56, Gurgaon, Haryana. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Nirmal Solanki Mr. Vikram Singh Ms. Suruchi Kasliwal Ms. Pragya Pandey For Respondent(s) For Complainant(s) : : Mr. Mahendra Meena, PP Mr. Amit Nehra Mr. T.C. Sharma HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPMAN

Order 07/05/2024

Both petitioner Dhirendra Yadav and complainant Rahul Grewal are present in person. Both are identified by their respective counsel.

By way of this criminal misc. petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the accused-petitioner has approached this Court seeking quashing of FIR No.222/2022 registered at Police Station Ashok Nagar, District Jaipur City (South) for offences punishable under Sections 420, 406, 467, 468 and 471 of IPC and all consequential proceedings arising of it.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that after registration of the impugned FIR, both parties have amicably resolved their dispute. On 03.10.2023, they have also executed a

[2024:RJ-JP:21700] (2 of 3) [CRLMP-7804/2023] Settlement Agreement in this regard. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner has also made payments in favour of the respondent - complainant in terms of the settlement agreement. An affidavit/undertaking dated 07.05.2024, sworn by complainant Rahul Grewal is also submitted before this Court. The same is taken on record. He thus, prays that the impugned FIR and all subsequent proceedings may be quashed on the basis of compromise entered between the parties.

Learned Public Prosecutor accepts the factum of compromise having been entered into between the parties without fear and coercion.

Learned counsel for the complainant admits the aforesaid factual position and submits that the complainant has no objection if the impugned FIR and all other subsequent proceedings arising out of it as well as all other litigation, as mentioned in the settlement agreement and affidavit/undertaking dated 07.05.2024, are quashed. Learned counsel also submits that if any GST refund is received to the complainant, he shall transfer the same to the bank accounts of the accused petitioner.

I have heard and perused the material available on record. The affidavit/undertaking sworn by the complainant reflects that the parties have resolved their dispute and he wants to withdraw/settle the impugned FIR in terms of the settlement agreement dated 03.10.2023 and affidavit/undertaking dated 07.05.2024. 7. In view of the aforesaid and considering the submissions made on behalf of the respective parties; material made available

[2024:RJ-JP:21700] (3 of 3) [CRLMP-7804/2023] for my perusal; considering that the parties have resolved their dispute and also finding that the present case is wholly covered by the principle of law laid down by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the case of Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab & Anr-reported in 2012 Cr.L.J. (SC) 4934 and in the case of State of Haryana & Ors. Vs. Choudhary Bhajan Lal & Ors. [AIR 1992 SC 604], the aforesaid FIR is liable to be quashed in view of compromise arrived at between the parties.

In view of the above, this criminal misc. petition is allowed and the FIR No.222/2022 registered at Police Station Ashok Nagar, District Jaipur City (South) is quashed and set aside. Consequence to follow. However, it is made clear that both the parties shall abide with the terms and conditions of the settlement agreement dated 03.10.2023 and the affidavit/undertaking dated 07.05.2024. 9. Stay application(s), if any, also stands disposed of. (ANIL KUMAR UPMAN),J DEEPA RANI -133

Reproduced from the public record of the Rajasthan High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.