Allowed

Vimal Jain v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC8 Sept 2023CRMP/1695/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Chhattisgarh quashed an FIR and criminal proceedings under Sections 420, 201, 120-B, and 34 of the IPC after recording a judicial statement where the complainant confirmed an out-of-court settlement with the petitioners without coercion.

What did the court decide?

FIR dated 26.07.2017, charge sheet, and criminal proceeding in Criminal Case No. 391/2018 are hereby quashed.

Vimal Jain Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Quashing and FIR | Chhattisgarh HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶4

Cr.M.P. No. 1695 of 2023

¶5

Vimal Jain, Son of Late Manic Chand Jain, aged 67 years

¶6

Varun Jain, son of Vimal Chand Jain, aged 40 years

¶7

Vaibhav Jain, aged 44, Son of Vimal Chand Jain

¶8

All resident of 22-B South Avenue Choubey Colony, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.)

¶9

---- Petitioners

¶10

Versus

¶11

State of Chhattisgarh, through Police Station Hirri, Bilaspur (C.G.)

¶12

Digvijay Singh Bali, Son of Shri Preet Pal Bali, Aged 25 years, Residence of R-7, Vinobha Nagar, Thana Tarbahar, District Bilaspur (C.G.)

¶13

---- Respondent For Petitioners : Mr. M.L. Saket, Advocate For Respondent No. 1/State: Mr. Shakti Singh Thakur, Panel Lawyer For Respondent No. 2 : Mr. Pragalbha Sharma, Advocate

¶14

Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board

¶15

08.09.2023

¶16

The petitioners have preferred the instant petition for discharging/quashment of charges framed under Sections 420, 201, 120-B read with Section 34 of IPC pending in criminal proceeding before the court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Bilha, District Bilaspur in Criminal Case No. 391/2018.

¶17

Parties i.e. petitioner No. 1 and respondent No. 2 appeared before this Court on 01.09.2023 and they have stated that they have settled their dispute amicably out of the Court and on that date this Court had

¶18

¶19

directed petitioner No. 1 and respondent No. 2 to appear before the Registrar (Judicial)/Additional Registrar (Judicial) of this Court for recording their statement. In view of the above direction of this Court, the parties appeared before the Registrar (Judicial) for recording of their statement and on 01.09.2023 the statements of the parties were recorded by the Registrar (Judicial), in which respondent No.2 has stated that for loss he has received a cheque bearing No. 650118 dated 01.09.2023 of Urban Mercantile Co-Operative Bank Limited of Rs.2 lacs from the petitioners, he further stated in his statement recorded before Registrar (Judicial) that he has amicably stetted the dispute with the petitioners without any pressure, fear, coercion or greed, and he does not want to pursue the criminal proceeding pending before the court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Bilha, District Bilaspur in Criminal Case No. 391/2018 against the petitioners.

¶20

From perusal of the statements of petitioner No. 1 and respondent No.2 it is apparent that they have amicably settled their disputes and respondent No.2 does not want to pursue the criminal proceeding pending before the court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Bilha, District Bilaspur in Criminal Case No. 391/2018 against the petitioners.

¶21

Learned counsels for the petitioners and respondent No. 2 would submit that the parties have amicably settled their dispute, therefore, the F.I.R., charge sheet and subsequent criminal proceeding pending against the petitioners may be quashed on the basis of compromise.

¶22

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the

¶23

¶24

documents.

¶25

In view of aforementioned facts and circumstances of the case as well as the law rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matters of Narinder Singh and Others Vs. State of Punjab and Another, (2014) 6 SCC 466 and Ramgopal and Another Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh, 2021 SCC Online SC 834 , and further considering the fact that petitioner No.1 and respondent No.2 have settled their dispute which is evident from the compromise arrived at between the parties dated 01.09.2023 recorded before the Registrar (Judicial) of this Court, the FIR dated 26.07.2017 bearing Crime No. 143/2017 registered against the petitioners, charge sheet filed against them and criminal proceeding pending before the court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Bilha, District Bilaspur (C.G.) in Criminal Case No. 391/2018 are hereby quashed.

¶26

Accordingly, the petition is allowed to the extent indicated hereinabove.

¶27

Sd/-

¶28

(Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge

¶29

vatti

Vimal Jain v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vimal Jain v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S Gurushree Buildcon Private Limited Vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 1 (1)

M/S Gurushree Industries Private Limited, Vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax

M/S Gurushree Minerals Private Limited Vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax

Laxman Prasad Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Ashok Kumar Setthi @ Avinash Setthi Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Lakshmi Yadav Vs State of Chhattisgarh