High Court allowed petition under Section 482 CrPC to quash FIR. Settlement between petitioner and complainant recorded before Additional Registrar (Judicial) without coercion supported quashing.
FIR No. 33317013180558 dated 18.06.2018 Quashed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
-1-
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
CRMP No. 363 of 2019
Versus
(Cause Title is taken from Case Information System)
For Petitioner : Mr. Dhiraj Kumar Wankhede, Advocate For Respondent No.1 : Mr. R. M. Solapurkar, Government Advocate For Respondent No.2 : Mr. Vinay Nagdev, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Saleem Kazi, Advocate
Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board
15.09.2023
-2-
decade, was nominated as a Director, Press Club Grih Nirman Co-operative Society Bilaspur, from the date of its formation. After completion of his tenure, one Tilak Raj Saluja was elected as a President of the said society. Thereafter, Tilak Raj Saluja along with respondent No.2 and others made a written complaint against the petitioner regarding embezzlement of money in selling of plots and their development . It is alleged that the State Government allocated 10.5 acres of land in Village Birkona, District Bilaspur and the petitioner and other office bearers sold 90 plots out of 165 plots at the rate of Rs. 14,000/- per plot, and an additional Rs. 35,000/- was also charged for development, but they did not deposit the amount so collected by them to the cooperative society's account.
-3-
proceedings.
-4-
case as well as the law rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matters of Ramgopal (supra) and Narinder Singh (supra), and further considering the fact that both the parties have settled their dispute which is evident from the statements dated 08.09.2023 recorded before the Additional Registrar (Judicial) of this Court, I feel inclined to allow this petition. Accordingly, the instant petition is allowed and the FIR No. 33317013180558 is hereby quashed.
Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge
Nadim
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the FIR regarding alleged embezzlement by petitioner should be quashed in view of settlement between parties.
If the settled dispute falls under categories allowing quashing of FIR despite Section 420 IPC charges.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Ramgopal And Another Vs State of Madhya PradeshReferred¶23
2021 SCC Online SC 834 · Who else cites this
Narinder Singh and Others Vs. State of Punjab and AnotherReferred¶23
2014(6) SCC 466 · Who else cites this
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Shashikant Konher
State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Civil Lines
Mahesh Kumar Tiwari
Rakesh Mohan Pandey
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
