1 Rule.
Service is waived. Upon the joint request made by the learned advocates for the parties, this matter is taken up for final disposal.
2 This application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [for short, 'the Code'] is filed by the petitioners to quash private criminal complaint being M. Case No.7 of 2009, now registered as Criminal Case No.1326 of 2010, filed by respondent No.3-HDFC Bank Limited, for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420, 120B and 114 of the Indian Penal Code, and the order dated 10.8.2009 passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Court No.22, Ahmedabad.
3 Heard the learned advocates for the parties.
4 At the outset, it is jointly submitted that the applicants have paid Rs. 3 crore 31 lakhs to respondent No.3-HDFC Bank towards full and final settlement of the dues, which is the subject matter of the complaint. The Authorized Signatory/Officer of the HDFC Bank, Mr. Abhijeet Joshi, has filed affidavit dated 21.3.2012 on behalf of the Bank and in paragraphs 1, 2 and 3, it is stated as under:
"1. That respondent No.2, original complainant, has filed private complaint before the Ld. Metropolitan Magistrate Court No.22, Ahmedabad, against the petitioners herein and other accused persons for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420, 120B and 114 of the Indian Penal Code. The said complaint was registered as M. Case No.7/09 at Ellis bridge Police Station against the petitioners. Subsequently, police completed the investigation and filed charge-sheet on the basis of the same the said complaint came to be culminated into Cri. Case No.1326/2010.
2. That subsequently, the compromise/settlement has taken place between the petitioners and respondent Bank, and Memorandum of Understanding is executed on 22.12.2010. The petitioners have paid the full and final settlement amount of Rs.3,31,00,000/- to the respondent-Bank [original complainant]. Hence, no grievance survives against the petitioners.
3. Under the aforesaid facts and circumstances as well as terms and conditions of the Memorandum of Understanding, respondent No.2, (original complainant) does not want to proceed further with the Criminal complaint/case."
Affidavit dated 21.3.2012 is ordered to be taken on record.
5 Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case and the nature of offences, and in view of Memorandum of Understanding executed on 22.12.2010 between the petitioners and the respondent-Bank, whereby, full and final settlement has been arrived at and, accordingly, Rs.3 crore 31 lakhs are already paid by the petitioners to the respondent-Bank and now no grievance survives, keeping in mind the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Nikhil Merchant vs. CBI, reported in (2008) 9 SCC 677, and Madan Mohan Abbot vs. State of Punjab, reported in (2008) 4 SCC 582, in my view, relegating the petitioners to undergo the rigors of trial is not just and proper. Hence, a case is made out to exercise powers under Section 482 of the Code to secure the ends of justice and, accordingly, the criminal complaint being M. Case No.7 of 2009, now registered as Criminal Case No.1326 of 2010, filed by respondent No.3-HDFC Bank Limited, for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420, 120B and 114 of the Indian Penal Code, and the order dated 10.8.2009 passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Court No.22, Ahmedabad, and further proceedings in connection therewith, are quashed and set aside qua the petitioners. The application is allowed to the aforesaid extent. Rule is made absolute. Direct service is permitted.
(ANANT S. DAVE, J.) (swamy) Top