Quashed

Rajendra Kumar Pahawa v. State

Rajasthan HC15 Mar 2022CRLMP/746/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court quashed FIR No.147/2019 registered for offences under Sections 420 and 406 of IPC. The court held that the petitions and complainant entered a compromise following a business transaction, deeming it expedient to quash the FIR in the interest of justice.

What did the court decide?

FIR No.147/2019 registered at P.S. Basni, District Jodhpur City has been quashed. Misc. petitions and stay petitions disposed of.

Rajendra Kumar Pahawa Vs State — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Rajasthan HC (2022)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT

¶2

JODHPUR

¶3

S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 746/2020

¶4

Rajendra Kumar Pahawa S/o Sant Kumar Pahawa, Aged About 60 Years, R/o Director, Goodluck Carbon Pvt. Ltd., D-54A, Second Floor, 100 Ft. Road, Chhatarpur Enclave, New Delhi.

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State of Rajasthan.

¶8

Rajesh Jain S/o Sh. Moti Lal Jain, Authorized Officer, M/s. S.R. Sales, Head Office, 8A-Second Floor, Heavy Industrial Area, Jodhpur.

¶9

----Respondents

¶10

Connected With

¶11

S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 2396/2020

¶12

Utkarsh Pahwa S/o Rajendra Kumar Pahawa, Aged About 29 Years, Director, Goodluck Carbon Pvt. Ltd., D-54A, Second Floor, 100 Ft. Road, Chhatarpur Enclave, New Delhi.

¶13

----Petitioner

¶14

Versus

¶15

State of Rajasthan.

¶16

Rajesh Jain S/o Sh. Moti Lal Jain, Authorized Officer, M/s. S.r. Sales, Head Office, 8A-Second Floor, Heavy Industrial Area, Jodhpur.

¶17

----Respondents

¶18

For Petitioner(s)	: Mr. A.K. Sharma, Sr. Advocate, assisted by Mr. Rachit Sharma through V.C. Mr. V.D. Vaishnav
For Respondent(s)	: Mr. Vikram Sharma, Public Prosecutor Mr. Chandraveer Singh for complainant

¶19

JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA Order

¶20

15/03/2022

¶21

These misc. petitions lay challenge to registration of the FIR No.147/2019, registered at P.S. Basni, District Jodhpur City (West) for the offences under Sections 420 & 406 of IPC.

¶22

During the pendency of the investigations, the petitioners and the complainant have entered into a compromise; accordingly

¶23

(2 of 2)

¶24

[CRLMP-746/2020]

¶25

substantial part of the due amount has been paid and for the remaining amount advance cheques have been given.

¶26

Mr. A.K. Sharma, learned Sr. Counsel, assisted by Mr. Rachit Sharma submits that the factum of compromise has been taken note of by the trial Court, while deciding petitioners’ bail application.

¶27

Mr. Chandraveer Singh, learned counsel for complainant does not dispute the aforesaid factual position.

¶28

Mr. Sharma, learned Sr. Counsel while submitting that the FIR in question was essentially lodged in order to recover the money and a civil dispute was given colour of criminal offence, prayed that the FIR be quashed in light of the compromise that has been arrived at.

¶29

Be that as it may.

¶30

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and considering that the petitioners and the complainant were having business transaction, this Court deems it expedient in the interest of justice to quash the FIR being guided by the principles laid down by Hon’ble the Supreme Court in the case of Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab & Anr. [(2012) 10 SCC 303] and State of Haryana & Ors. Vs. Choudhary Bhajan Lal & Ors. [AIR 1992 SC 604].

¶31

The impugned FIR No.147/2019 is hereby quashed.

¶32

Misc. petitions stand disposed of accordingly.

¶33

Stay petitions and all interlocutory applications also stand disposed of.

¶34

(DINESH MEHTA),J

¶35

211-212-Ramesh/-

Rajendra Kumar Pahawa v. State

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajendra Kumar Pahawa v. State

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kundan Mal Vs State of Rajasthan

Dharmendra Kumar Choudhary Vs State of Rajasthan

Uma Pareek Vs Motiram

Abdul Kamran Vs State of Rajasthan

Bhanwari Vs State of Rajasthan

Ramswaroop Soni Vs State of Rajasthan