Allowed

Mr. Indranil Mukherjee, v. State of Telangana

Telangana HC27 Jan 2025CRLP/6010/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a criminal petition and miscellaneous applications to quash the proceedings in FIR No. 431 of 2019 after recording a post-filing compromise between the accused and the de-facto complainant, directed payment of court fees, and quashed the FIR against the accused.

What did the court decide?

Criminal Petition CRL.P. No. 6010 of 2019 and I.A. Nos. 1, 2, and 3 of 2024 allowed; FIR No. 431 of 2019 quashed against Accused No. 1.

Mr. Indranil Mukherjee, Vs State of Telangana — Cheque Dishonour | Telangana HC (2025)

¶1

--.\

¶2

[³²⁵¹ ]

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶4

MONDAY, THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER

¶7

l.A.Nos.1 2 AND 3 0F 2024 IN/AND

¶8

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 6010 OF 2019

¶9

Between:

¶10

Mr. Indranil Mukherjee, S/o Mr. Dinamani Mukherjee. Rlo N204, Sahayog CHS, Godbunder Road, Thane (West), Apna Bazar, Thane-400610, Maharashtra. Rep. by his G.P.A.Holder Mr. Ramesh Pawle as per Court Order dated 03.01.2025 vide l.A.No.3 of 2024made in Crl.P.60'10 of 2019.

¶11

...PETITIONER/ACCUSED No.1

¶12

AND

¶13

State of Telangana,, Rep.by Police Medchal, Cyberabad. Through its Public Prosecutor. High Court of Telangana. at Hyderabad

¶14

Station House Officer., Economic Offences Wing-CCS. Cyber"abad, Through its Public Prosecutor. High Court of Telan$ana, at Hyderabad.

¶15

Mr. Bharath Vasireddy,, S/o Mr. Satyanarayana, Rlo 2O1, Phase ll, AK Enclave. Rd, No.3, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad.

¶16

...RESPONDENTS/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT

¶17

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to call for the records relating to FIR No. 431 ot 2019 on the File of Police Station Medchal currently investigated by Economic Offences Wing, CCS, Cyberabad and quash the same.

¶18

l.A. NO: 1 OF 2024

¶19

Between:

¶20

Mr. Bharath Vasireddy,, S/o Mr. Satyanarayana, R/o 201, Phase lL, AK Enclave. Rd No.3, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad.

¶21

...PETITIONER/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT/RESPONDENT No.3

¶22

AND

¶23

-r:-

¶24

1 . State of Telangana,, Rep.by Police Medchal, Cyberabad. Through its public Prosecutor High Court of Telangana at Hyderabad

¶25

Station House Officer., Economic Offences Wing-CCS. Cyberabad, Through its Public Prosecutor. High Court of Telangana, at Hyderabad.

¶26

Mr lndranil Mukherjee, S/o Mr. Dinamani lVlukherjee. PUo. N204, Sahayog CHS, Godbunder Road, Thane (West), Apna Bazar, Thane-400610.

¶27

...RESPONDENTS/ACCUSED No.1/PETITTONER

¶28

Petition under Section 359(6) of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of criminal petition, the High court may be pleased to permit the Petitioner to compound the offences undei section 420, 465, 468, 471, 120b rlw. 34 of lpC by permission to compromise the proceedings/complaint in FIR No.43'l of 2019 on the file of Medchal pS, against the accused No.'l in the interest of the justice.

¶29

I.A. NO: 2OF 2024

¶30

Petition under section 359(2) of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of criminal petition, the High court may be pleased to record the compromise the proceedings in crl.p.No. 6010 of 201g and quash the proceedings/complaint in FIR No.431 ol 2019 on the file of Medchal PS, against the accused No.1 in the interest of the justice.

¶31

Between:

¶32

Mr. lndranil Mukherjee, S/o Mr. Dinamani Mukherjee. Rlo N204, Sahayog CHS, Godbunder Road, Thane fl/r/est), Apna Bazar, fhane-4006.10, Maharashtra-_^- (Petitioner being Represented by the GpA Holder Mr. Ramesh pawle s/o. Sh. Namdev Ramakrishna Pawle, Aged 54 years, occ: plant Head oyster Medlsafe Private Limited, R/o. 555, plot No.43, Swarnadhamnagar, Bowenpaliy, Hyderabad, 50001 1 0

¶33

...PET|T|ONER/ACCUSED No.1

¶34

AND

¶35

State of Telangana,, Rep.by^police Medchal, Cyberabad. Through its public Prosecutor. High Court of Telangana. at Hyderabad

¶36

Station House Officer., Economic Offences Wing-CCS. Cyberabad, Through its Public Prosecutor. High Court of Telangana, at Hyderabad.

¶37

Mr. Bharath Vasireddy,, S/o Mr. Satyanaruyana, R/o201, phase ll, AK Enclave. Rd. No.3, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad.

¶38

...RESPONDENTS/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT

¶39

Petition under section 528 of BNSS praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of criminal Fetition, the High court may be pleased to permit Mr.Ramesh pawre (GpA Holder), to record thJ compromiie in the above case and quash the proceedings/compiaint in FlR.No.43.l^'of 20,19

¶40

on the file of P.S. Medchal Station, in Crl.P.No.6010 of 2019 on behalf of Accused No.2 to 4 in the interest of the^justice.

¶41

l.A. NO: 2 OF 2019

¶42

Petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C^praying that in the circumstances stated in the lvlemorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition,the High Court may be pleased to stay all further proceedings including arrest^pursuant to the registering of Crime in FIR No. 43112019 on the file of Police Station, Economic Offences Wing, CCS, Cyberabad Medchal being investigated by 2nd Respondent pending disposal of the above criminal petition.

¶43

l.A. NO: 4 OF 2019

¶44

Between:

¶45

Mr. Bharath Vasireddy,, S/o Mr. Satyananyana, R/o 201 , Phase ll, AK Enclave. Rd No.3, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad.

¶46

...PETITIONER/ACCUSED No.1

¶47

AND

¶48

'1 . lvlr. lndranil Mukherjee, S/o lvlr. Dinamani Mukherjee. Rlo N204, Sahayog CHS, Godbunder Road, Thane (West), Apna Bazar, Thane-4006'10, Maharashtra, Rep. by his G.P.A.Holder Mr. Ramesh Rawle as per Court Order dated 03.01.2025 vide l.A.No.3 of 2024 made in Crl.P 6010 of 2019.

¶49

State of Telangana,, Rep.by Police Medchal, Cyberabad. Through its Public Prosecutor. High Court of Telangana. at Hyderabad

¶50

Station House Officer., Economic Offences Wing-CCS. Cyberabad, Through its Public Prosecutor, High Court of Telangana, at Hyderabad.

¶51

...RESPONDENTS/DEFACTO COMPLAINANT

¶52

Petition under Section 482 ol Cr.P .C praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be pleased to vacate the interim order, dated 24.09.2019 in CRLP No. 6010 of 2019 in the interest of^justice.

¶53

This Petition coming on for hearing, upon^perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri Bokaro Lokeshwar Reddy, Advocate for the Petitioner and Sri M. Vivekananda Reddy, Assistant Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent Nos.1 and 2, and M/s. P. Snigdha Reddy, Advocate for the Respondent No.3

¶54

The Court made the following: COMMON ORDER

¶55

i i ; I I

¶56

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K. SURENDER

¶57

CRIMINAL PETITION No.6O1O OF 2019 ALONG WITH I.A.Nos.1 2 &,3 0F 2024

¶58

COMMON ORDER:

¶59

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., against the petitioner/A- 1 seeking to quash the proceedings in FIR.No.431 of 2079 on the file of P.S., Medchal. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 42O, 465, 468, 47 7 and 12Ob r/w.34 of IPC

¶60

Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri M.Vivekananda Reddy, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for the State. Perused the record.

¶61

During thc pendency of the present Criminal Petition, the parties have compromised the matter and, accordingly, respondent No.3-de facto complatnant filed I.A.Nos. 1, 2 and 3 of 2024 to record the compromise and to compound the offences.

¶62

Vide order dated 19. 12.2024, this Court, after recording the submissions made by the iearned counsel for the petitioner as well as respondent No.3, directed the parties to appear before the Secretar5z, Telangana High Court Legal Services Committee for their identifrcation and on completion of the same, directed the

¶63

¶64

¶65

Secretary, Legal Services Committee to submit a report by 10 01.2025. In compliance of the said order, the Secretary, Legal Services Committee submitted report dated OZ.Ol.2O2S.

¶66

In the report dated OT.OL.2O2S, it is stated that both the parties are duly identified ancl copies of their Aadhar cards are endorsed by their respective counsel. It is further stated that both the parties have willfully entered into compromise.

¶67

The parties herein have filed a joint memo of compromise. The said joint memo of compromise and the report of the Secretary, Legal Services Committee, dated OZ.Ol.2O2S are placed on record.

¶68

7 . In view ol the compromise entered bctween the petitioner/ A-1 and respondent No.3, I.A.Nos.l, 2 and 3 of 2A24 are allowed. Consequently, the Criminal Petition is allowed arrd the proceedings in FIR.No.43 1 of 2Ol9 on the file of p.S., Medchai, is hereby quashed against the petitioner/A-1. petitioner/A-1 undertakes to pay an amount of Rs.1O,OO0/-(Rupees Ten Thousand Only) to the Telalgana High Court Advocate,s Association, Hyderabad, within a period of ten days from today, and file proof of the same into the Registry.

¶69

¶70

l I

¶71

As a sequel, the miscellaneous Petitions, pending if any,

shall stand closed.

//TRUE COPY//

Sd/- P. PADMANABHA BEDDY ASSISTANT REGIPTRAR ^/V

¶76

SECTION OFFICER

¶77

To,

¶78

The XXll Additional Metropolitan Magistrate at Medchal, Cyberabad.

¶79

Two CCs to the Public Prosecutor, High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad[OUT]

¶80

The Station House Officer, Medchal Police Station, Cyberabad

¶81

The Station House Officer, Economic Offences Wing-CCS. Cyberabad.

¶82

One CC to Sri Bokaro Lokeshwar Reddy, Advocate [OPUC]

¶83

One CC to Mis. P.Snigdha Reddy, Advocate [OPUC]

¶84

Two CD Copies

¶85

(along with the copy of memo of compromise)

¶86

Plp/gh

¶87

Note: Total AmountofRs- 10,000/- ( Rupees Ten thousand only )has been paid by Sri B. Lokeshwar Reddy, Counsel for the Petitioner as directed by the Hon'ble Court vide order dated 27.01.2025 to the Telangana High Court Advocates Association, Hyderabad and filed Memo as proof of compliance USR No.16502 6f 2O2S and dated 14-02-2025.

.'''$'i'.,{''e-

HIGH GOURT

DATED:2710112025

COMMON ORDER

|.A.NOS.1 ,2 & 3 0F 2024 CRLP.No.6010 of 2019

¶93

1 \lE sTAf e-
(
a
za
o 2 3 hPil ?025
+
.A
f.tr*SI'4I

¶94

ALLOWING THE CRL.P. AND THE I.A.NOS.1, 2 AND 3 OF 2024 1z/ 7/+zts

¶95

1re

¶96

IN THE HONBLE HIGH COTIRT OF TELANGANA AT H\DERABAD

¶97

CRL.P.NO. 6010 0F 20t9

¶98

(In FIR No.43 1 of 2019 on the frle of P.S. Medchal)

¶99

Between

¶100

Mr Indranil Mukherl'ee, S/o Mr Diqamani Mukhe4'ee, RIO A/2O4, Sahayog CHS, Godbtmder Road, Thane West, Apna Bazar, Thane, 400610, Maharashtra.

¶101

... Petitioner/Accused No. 1

¶102

AND

¶103

State of Telangala, Rep by Police Medchal Cyberabad Through its Public Prosecutor High Court of Telangana, Hyderabad. .

¶104

Station House Officer, Economii'Offences Wing, CCS Cyberabad Through its Public Prosecutor, High Court of Telangana at Hyderabad.

¶105

Mr Bharath Vasireddy S/o Mr Sat5ranarayala Rio, 201 Phase IL, AK Enclave, Rd No 3, Baljara Hills, Hyderabad Respondents/ De-facto Complainant

¶106

JOINT MEMO OF COMPROMISE PILED.BY PETITIONER & 3'd RESPONDENT

¶107

It is submitted that the captioned Petition was filed by Petitioner herein praying that the Hon'ble Court may be pleased to call for the records in connection with FIR No. 431/2019 on the file of SHO, Police Station, Medchal and quash the same and to pass such other or further orders as this Hon'ble Court deems fit in the facts and circumstances of the^case,

¶108

N*A'

¶109

It is submitted that the offences were registered against Petitioner and other accused arrayed in the Complaint, in capacity of directors of Oyster Medisafe Pvt. Ltd. ("Company").

¶110

It is submitted that the Company and 3rd Respondent have agreed on the terms of understanding by which the de-facto complainant will not file any further cases against the Company,{Petitioner in the future and will not pursue the present criminal case as a compromise has been arrived between vide Settlement Agreement dt.26-06-2024.

¶111

It is submitted that in the above said criminal petition, the 3'd respondent who is defacto-complainant in the case has settled the issue and has entered into Compromise vide Settlement Agreement dt.26-06-2024. That the 3.d respondent is willing to compromise/quash the FIR No.43 1 of 20 19 on the file of Medchal Police Station and to that effect the defacto-complainant is filing affidavit before this Hon'ble court. It is submitted that in view of the settlement between the parties the matter may be closed. by allowing the quash petition and either of the parties have no objection and claims or rights against each other in the future.

¶112

It is therefore prayed that this Hon'ble court may be pleased to consider the affidavit of the Petitioner and record the compromise and allow the Criminal petition in the interest ofjustice and pass such other order or orders as it deems fit and proper in the circumstances ofthe case.

¶113

N,c" Petitioner/Accused No: 1 Counsel etitioner

¶114

3'd RespondenV Complainant
Counsel for the Respondent

¶115

,rtt'i&.*i;rY.':1xtl'

Mr. Indranil Mukherjee, v. State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr. Indranil Mukherjee, v. State of Telangana

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

Arigala Srinu , Yarra Srinu Vs the State of Telangana

M/s Swarna Bharathi, Vs The State of Andhra Pradesh

R.K. Bhagwandas, Vs the State of a.P., Rep by Pp., and Another

Narne Gokul Vs the State of Telangana

G. Nagaveni Vs The State of Telangana

Uppala Satyaarayana Vs the State of Telangana