VoxJuris
Home › High Courts › Delhi High Court 2013 › High Court of Delhi

Sheikh Hasmat & Ors v. State & Ors

Court
High Court of Delhi
Decided
24 July 2013
Bench
Veena Birbalauthor
Case no.
CRL.M.C. 2842/2013

Judgment

ORDER %

24.07.2013 CRL.M.A.10831/2013 in CRL.M.C. 2840/2013 CRL.M.A.10832/2013 in CRL.M.C. 2841/2013 CRL.M.A.10833/2013 in CRL.M.C. 2842/2013 Allowed, subject to just exceptions. CRL.M.C. 2840/2013. CRL.M.C. 2841/2013 & CRL.M.C. 2842/2013 Notice. Learned counsel for State accepts notice. The counselforrespondentno.2is alsopresentand acceptsnotice. Withthe consentof partiesthe matteris takenup for final disposal. These petitions under Section482 Cr.P.C. are for quashingof three FIRs i.e. FIR No. 164/2001 under Section 406 IPG at P.S. Parliament Street, FIR No. 166/2001 under Section 406 IPG at P.S. Parliament Street and FIR No. 175/2001 under Section 406 IPG at P.S. Parliament Street registered against the petitioners as well as subsequent proceedings arising therefrom pending in the court of learned M.M., Patiala House Gourts, New Delhi. It is stated that a lease agreement was entered into between the complainant/respondent no.2 company and petitioners' firm in December 1990. In terms of that, the petitioners' firm was requiredto pay a sum of Rs.1,44,340/- per month as lease amount for a period of 36 months. Subsequently,the paymentschedulewas changed. Some instalmentswere given by the petitionersand thereafterdue to non payment of complete amount, the aforesaid three FIRs were registered against the petitioners. During the pendency of proceedingsbefore the learned M.M., the matter was referred to Delhi High Court Mediation and Conciliation Centre wherein the matter has been settled. The settlement agreement between the parties is at page 34 of the paper book. It is stated that in terms of settlement,the petitioners have already paid Rs.30 lakhs to the respondent no.2 by way of demand draft, the details of which given on page 39 of paper book and there is acknowledgement of learned counsel for respondent no.2 of having received the bank drafts stated therein. The balance amount of Rs.l lakh in terms of settlement agreement has been given today by way of bank draft in the name of respondent no.2. The authorised representative of respondent no.2 is also present along with counsel for respondent no.2. The authority letter in his name is at page 14 of the paper book. The respondent no.2 has also filed an affidavit wherein it is stated that respondent no.2 has no objection in quashing of aforesaid FIRs and subsequent proceedings arising therefrom and they have also confirmed the above position. Learned counsel for State has stated that some costs be imposed on the petitioners for using Statemachineryand precious time of the court. Consideringthatthe presentis a disputeof civilnatureandthe parties have amicably settled the matter and payment in terms of settlementhas been given to respondentno.2, there is no point in keeping the aforesaid FIRs pending. Accordingly, the aforesaid three FIRs and subsequent proceedings arising therefrom are quashed. The petitioners shall deposit Rs.15,000/- as costs with Prime Minister's National Relief Fund to be utilised towards Uttrakhand tragedy within two weeks from today. List for reporting compliance on 08.08.2013. Dasti. JULY 24,2013 srb VEENABIRBAL,J

Case details

Parties and counsel

$-20, 21, 22 * IN THE HIQH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. 2840/2013 SHEIKH HASMAT & ORS Petitioners Through; Mr.ParvezA. SiddiquiwithMr.Sunil Sagar, Advocates versus STATE & ORS Respondents Through:Mr.PawanSharma,St.CounselforState. Mr.T.C.Sagar,Adv. for R-2 alongwith ^ Mr.YugulKishoreAggarwal,Authorised Representative. S.I. Mukesh Kumar. AND + CRL.M.C. 2841/2013 SHEIKH HASMAT & ORS Petitioners Through:Mr.ParvezA. Siddiquiwith Mr.Sunil Sagar, Advocates versus STATE & ORS Respondents Through: Mr.Pawan Sharma, St.Counsel for State. Mr.T.C. Sagar, Adv. for R-2 alongwith Mr.Yugul Kishore Aggarwal, Authorised Representative. S.I. Mukesh Kumar. AND + CRL.M.C. 2842/2013 SHEIKH HASMAT & ORS Petitioners Through: Mr.Parvez A. Siddiqui with Mr.Sunil Sagar, Advocates versus Certify that the digital and physical file have been compared and the digital data is as per the physical file and no page is missing. STATE& ORS Respondents Through;Mr.PawanSharma,St.Counselfor State. Mr.T.C.Sagar,Adv. forR-2 alongwith Mr.YugulKishoreAggarwal,Authorised Representative. S.I. Mukesh Kumar. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE VEENA BIRBAL

Source: High Court of Delhi, through the eCourts High Court services, via the Indian High Court Judgments open dataset by Dattam Labs (CC BY 4.0). Text was extracted from the official PDF and may contain conversion errors. Check the official PDF before relying on it.