Remanded

Gurdeep Singh Suddan and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko and Another

Allahabad HC19 Nov 2024A482/9470/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an application to quash criminal proceedings, the applicant claimed the FIR was based on a business dispute where the security amount was adjusted after accounting. The private respondent contested this, stating the amount was never received. The court adjourned the plea for the next date before directing both parties to appear before the Mediation and Conciliation Center to resolve the matter,

What did the court decide?

The case is referred to the Mediation and Conciliation Center of this Court; interim order continues to operate.

Gurdeep Singh Suddan and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko and Another — Allahabad HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

¶1

Court No. - 13

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 9470 of 2024

¶3

Applicant :- Gurdeep Singh Suddan And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Amarjeet Singh Rakhra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.

¶5

On 19.11.2024 following order was passed:-

¶6

"1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶7

2. The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is filed with the prayer to quash the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 13524 of 2023; State Vs. Gurdeep Singh Suddan & Anr., pending before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kheri.

¶8

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicants as well as private respondent were involved in a business and there was some dispute in the business transaction. He further submits that amount of Rs.1,50,00,000/- was given back to the private respondent, even then, on the basis of concocted facts, F.I.R. in question was lodged. He also submits that relevant evidences were given to the Investigating Officer but the same was not considered and charge sheet was submitted by the Investigating Officer.

¶9

4. Learned A.G.A. requested for some time to seek instructions on the point that whether the statement of account of business transaction was considered by the Investigating Officer or not.

¶10

5. List this case on 28.11.2024 at 11:30 A.M.

¶11

6. On the next date, Investigating Officer/S.H.O. concerned shall appear before this Court alongwith complete case diary and inform that whether the statement of account of business transaction was considered or not.

¶12

7. Till the next date of listing, no coercive action shall be taken taken against the applicants.

¶13

8. The S.H.O., Police Station Palia Kala, District Lakhimpur Kheri shall also ensure the presence of Sushil Kumar Agarwal, R/o 236, Kisan Second, Kasba, Palia Kala, Lakhimpur Kheri."

¶14

In pursuance of aforesaid order, Station House Officer, Police Station Palia Kala, District Lakhimpur Kheri along with private respondent Sri Sushil Kumar Agarwal is present.

¶15

Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that the

¶16

applicants are running the registered company, namely, Magicon Implex Pvt Ltd under the provisions of Companies Act and they are doing business of mobile phone. He has further submitted that the private respondent was deputed as CNF in the year 2015 in the company of the applicants and the registered business agreement was executed between them on 01.09.2015 by which it was decided that a sum of rupees two crores as security amount was to be deposited by the private respondent and the same was transferred in the account of the applicants and thereafter the articles were being supplied and business was going on smoothly.

¶17

He has further submitted that aforesaid money was adjusted after accounting the ledger of the business transaction and rest of the amount i.e Rs.1,50,00,000/- was returned by the applicants in the year 2018 and later on, an agreement was executed on 19.02.2019 that the private respondent shall again transfer the amount of Rs.1,30,00,000/- as security amount but the said amount was not transferred. He has next submitted that as per the account of Company approximately Rs.34,00,000/- is still due on the private respondent but only to avoid to return the said amount, he took shelter of criminal prosecution by lodging the FIR and started making pressure on the applicants. He has also submitted that it is a case of audit of the account not for lodging the FIR. He has lastly submitted that as per provisions of Sales of Goods Act, money suit is available to the complainant, therefore, entire criminal proceeding is liable to be set aside.

¶18

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer of applicants and has submitted that after investigation charge sheet has already been filed and all these facts cannot be considered at this stage but he does not dispute the fact that the dispute in question is based on the audit of account of the applicants as well as the complainant related to the business in question.

¶19

Private respondent is present before this Court and informs that on 19.02.2019 agreement was executed by mentioning that Rs.1,30,00,000/- would be deposited as security amount and the same is to be transferred in the account of the applicants. He has also submitted that the said amount was already lying with the applicants, therefore the same was not transferred by him but it was never returned by the applicants.

¶20

Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and going through the contents of the aforesaid agreement as well as other relevant documents, this Court is of the view that the matter requires consideration before the

¶21

Mediation and Conciliation Center of this Court.

¶22

In view of above, the matter is referred to the Mediation and Conciliation Center of this Court.

¶23

Applicants as well as opposite party No.2 are directed to appear before the Mediation and Conciliation Center of this Court on 17.12.2024 at 11.30 a.m.

¶24

List this case on 24.02.2025 along with mediation report.

¶25

Interim order granted earlier shall continue to operate until further order of this Court.

¶26

Order Date :- 28.11.2024 Renu/-

¶27

Digitally signed by :- RENU AGARWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Gurdeep Singh Suddan and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gurdeep Singh Suddan and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Dilip Chhugani vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Dan Bahadur Yadav vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and Another

Janardan Bajpai vs Inder Jeet Singh, Administrator / Nagar Ayukt, Nagar Nigam, Lko. and Others

Smt. Naseema Khatoon and 3 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Secy. Ministry of Home Affairs and Another

Pankaj Kumar Alias Pankaj Kumar Rawat vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home and Another

Surendra Kumar Mishra and Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Cane Development Lko. and 3 Others