Allowed

Mr. Komaraiah Malka v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC1 May 2024CRMP/78/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court quashed an FIR registered under Sections 420 and 34 IPC following an amicable settlement between the complainant and the accused. The court held that since the grievance was redressed and no amount remained to be recovered, the continuation of criminal proceedings was unnecessary.

What did the court decide?

Quashing of FIR Crime No. 98/2021 registered at Police Station Katghora.

Mr. Komaraiah Malka Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Quashing and FIR | Chhattisgarh HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶4

CRMP No. 587 of 2021

¶5

Mr. Abhishek Kumar S/o Bijoy Bahadur Sinha Aged About 45 Years R/o Flat No. 1901, Anmol Prestige Tower, Excel Estate, Near Bmc Garden / Jain Mandir, Govindji Shroff Road, Off S.V. Road, Goregaon (West), Mumbai - 400104., District : Mumbai, Maharashtra

¶6

---- Petitioner

¶7

Versus

¶8

State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Home Department Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Raipur (Chhattisgarh), District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

¶9

Station House Officer Police Station Katghora, District Korba (Chhattisgarh), District : Korba, Chhattisgarh

¶10

Mohd. Usman Khan S/o Mohd. Sultan Khan Aged About 42 Years R/o Ward 23, Near Women Police Station, Mashanganj, Bilaspur (Chhattisgarh), District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

¶11

---- Respondents

¶12

CRMP No. 78 of 2022

¶13

Mr. Komaraiah Malka S/o Late Shri Venkataiah Malka Aged About 60 Years R/o 07 Floor, Minerva Hills, 94 S D Road, Secundrabad, Hyderabad, Telangana.

¶14

Vidya Nambirajan D/o Nambirajan Aged About 55 Years R/o H.No. 37-95/54, Road, No. 4, Mathura Nagar Naredmet, Paramount House, Sainikpuri, Hyderabad, Telangana 500094.

¶15

J. Laxmikanth S/o Lt. Shri J. Narsing Rao Aged About 67 Years R/o Plot No. 169 Balramrai Colony Mahendra Hills Road No. 4, East Maredpally, Secundrabad, Hyderabad, Telangana 500026.

¶16

---- Petitioners

¶17

Versus

¶18

State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Katghora, District Korba.

¶19

Mohd. Usman Khan S/o Md. Sultan Khan R/o Ward 23, Near Mahila Thana Mashanganj, Bilaspur Chhattisgarh.

¶20

---- Respondents

¶21

¶22

CRMP No. 1206 of 2021

¶23

Mr. Naveen Malka S/o Shri Mallesham Malka Aged About 35 Years Presently Residing At 1,-136/1 Bhanampally (G. P.)ammannapet, Karimnagar, Andhra Pradesh 505172

¶24

---- Petitioner

¶25

Versus

¶26

State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Katghora, District Korba Chhattisgarh

¶27

Mohd. Usman Khan S/o Salman Khan Near Mahila Thana, Mashanganj, Bilaspur Chhattisgarh

¶28

---- Respondents

¶29

(Cause-title taken from Case Information System)

¶30

For Petitioner in CRMP No. : Mr. Aman Saxena, Advocate. 587 of 2021 For Petitioner in CRMP Nos. : Mr. Shreshtha Gupta, Advocate. 1206 of 2021 and 78 of 2022

¶31

For Respondents/State : Mr. Sangharsh Pandey, Government Advocate.

¶32

For Respondent No. 3 in CRMP : Mr. Abhishek C. Gupta, Advocate. No. 587 of 2021 and respondent No. 2 in CRMP Nos. 1206 of 2021 and 78 of 2022

¶33

Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Smt. Rajani Dubey, Judge

¶34

Order on Board

¶35

Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice

¶36

02.05.2024

¶37

Heard Mr. Aman Saxena, learned counsel for the petitioner in CrMP

¶38

No. 587 of 2021 and Mr. Shreshta Gupta, learned counsel for the

¶39

¶40

petitioners in CrMP No.1206 of 2021 and 78 of 2022. Also heard Mr. Sangharsh Pandey, learned Government Advocate, appearing for the respondents/State and Mr. Abhishek C. Chandra, learned counsel, appearing for the respondent No. 3 in CrMP No. 587 of 2021 and respondent No. 2 in CrMP Nos. 1206 of 2021 and 78 of 2022.

¶41

Since common facts are involved in these cases, they are being considered and decided by this common order.

¶42

Challenge in these petitions is to the registration of FIR being Crime No. 98/2021 registered at Police Station Katghora, District – Korba for the offences under Section 420 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (for short, the IPC).

¶43

The respondent No. 2 is the complainant, who had lodged an FIR against the present petitioners. As per the prosecution story, the complainant - Mohd. Usman Khan made a complaint to SHO, Katghora alleging that in July 2020, Asset Reconstruction Company India Limited (hereafter called as ARCIL) had approached to Rituraj Steel Private Limited (further called as RSPL) for the sale of Jatashankari Small Hydro Electric Project situated at Gram Chevdhara, Tehsil Pondi- Uproda Katghora District Korba and the deal was finalized for a consideration amount Rs. 6,35,000,00/-, On 10/08/2020 amount of Rs 1,00,00,000/- was deposited directly in the account of ARCIL by RSPL, through the Managing Director Mr. Rahul Bajpay. Thereafter, in continuation a MOU (Memorandum of Understanding) was signed by Managing Director Mr. Rahul Bajpay

¶44

¶45

and Shalivahana Green Energy Limited (hereafter called as SGEL) through its Director Mr. Naveen Malka on 09/10/2020 and in consideration on 26/10/2020 an amount of Rs. 2,00,000,00/- (two crores rupees) was deposited by RSPL as per MOU. Thereafter on 29/10/2020 both the parties entered into the Sale and Purchase of Shares Agreement (hereafter called as "AGREEMENT"). As alleged SGEL has to handover the NOCs (No Objection Certificate) various departments to the RSPL within a time span of 90 days. In continuation of the contract some CCTV cameras were installed and security guards were employed by the RSPL and was duly informed to the ARCIL and SGEL. On 23/01/2021 and 27/01/2021 the RSPL wrote letters to SGEL regarding the due payment of the consideration amount and also shared the bank details of the RSPL so that the further remaining amount can be deposited and no reply from SGEL received, thus there is intention to cheat and harm the RSPL as another deal was signed with the third party and RSPL is now offered by SGEL a contract for a consideration amount of Rs.8,00,00,000/- inspite the earlier decided amount. On the complaint of the complainant, the police has registered an FIR under the offence u/s 420 read with section 34 of Indian Penal Code.

¶46

At the outset, learned counsel for the respondent No. 2 / Complainant submits that the respondent No. 2 / Complainant does not want to pursue the matter further as the petitioners and the respondent No. 2 / Complainant have settled their dispute amicably

¶47

¶48

and no amount is left either to be paid or to be recovered from either of the parties.

¶49

In view of the above submission, since the grievance raised by the respondent No. 2 / Complainant in the FIR in question stands redressed, this Court of the view that the same deserves to be quashed.

¶50

Consequently, the FIR bearing Crime No. 98/2021 registered at Police Station Katghora, District – Korba for the offences under Sections 420 and read with Section 34 of the IPC, is quashed.

¶51

Resultantly, all these petitions, stand allowed .

¶52

Sd/- Sd/- (Rajani Dubey) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice

¶53

Hem

Mr. Komaraiah Malka v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr. Komaraiah Malka 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Anuj Kumar Agrawal and Another Vs State

Dr. Prabhat Panigrahi Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Manpreet Kaur Gandhi Vs the State of Chhattisgarh

Dr. Priyanka Jaiswal Vs Union of India

Manoj Shrivastava Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Vimal Yadav Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Others