Research › Search › Judgment

Gujarat High Court · body

2018 DIGILAW 312 (GUJ)

RAVI SHYAM JAVA v. STATE OF GUJARAT

2018-01-30

J.B.PARDIWALA

body2018
JUDGMENT : 1. By this application under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the petitioner seeks to invoke the inherent powers of this court, praying for quashing of the first information report being I C.R. No. 130 of 2016 lodged before the Ghatlodiya Police Station, Ahmedabad City of the offence punishable under sections 406, 420 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code on the ground that there has been an amicable settlement between the parties and the respondent No.2- original complainant is no longer desirous of prosecuting the first information report further. The respondent No.2-Jay Sundardas Khurshija is personally present and he confirms about the settlement arrived at with the accused person. The respondent No.2- Jay Sundardas Khurshija is identified by his learned advocate Mr. Rishi O. Malik. The respondent No.2 makes a statement that he has received the entire payment of Rs.1,80,00,000/- and he has no grievance now to redress. He consents for quashing of the first information report. Shri Jay Sundardas Khurshija has also filed an affidavit, inter alia, stating as under: “I, Jay Kursija, S/o. Sundardas Kursija (represented Sankalp Recreation Pvt. Ltd.) aged about 52 years, Occupation: Service, having address at 401, Sankalp Square, Drive In Road, Ahmedabad, file the following affidavit and state on solemn affirmation as under, that; 1. I am working with Sankalp Recreation Pvt. Ltd. And filed one complaint vide FIR No.I/130/2017 dated 21.12.2016 under section 406, 420 and 120B of Indian Penal Code at Ghatlodia Police Station, against Mr. Ravi Java who was working with Wind World India Ltd. That I am well conversant with the said FIR and well verse with the incident happened which is related to the commercial transaction. I am competent to file the present affidavit and do hereby undertake to file the same before any Court since we had come to the consensus to have amicable settlement for the reason mentioned herein below. 2. In the present case, the impugned FIR was lodged by me against the accused person (Mr. Ravi Java-Wind World India Ltd.) with related to the commercial transaction between my company (Sankalp Recreation Pvt. Ltd.) and Wind World India Ltd. (represented by Mr. Ravi Java the Accused) for the supply, installation, testing and Commissioning of 0.8 MW Wind Energy Generation & its accessories vide term sheet (Agreement) dated 16.12.2015. Ravi Java-Wind World India Ltd.) with related to the commercial transaction between my company (Sankalp Recreation Pvt. Ltd.) and Wind World India Ltd. (represented by Mr. Ravi Java the Accused) for the supply, installation, testing and Commissioning of 0.8 MW Wind Energy Generation & its accessories vide term sheet (Agreement) dated 16.12.2015. Since the supply/transaction was not possible by the accused company due to some technical issues, therefore, the said agreement was come to an end mutually by executing mutual termination agreement dated 11.01.2017. Both the parties have agreed to terminate the said transaction and decided to close the matter in good term, and therefore, reached on the compromise/settlement between (undersign applicant) complainant and the accused and taken this step in the interest of maintaining healthy relations in the market which is required for the growth of any business. That, therefore the undersign complainant do not intend to prosecute with the case any further and intends to state that I have no objection if the impugned FIR be quashed/cancel and set aside in the interest of maintaining business relations amongst us. 3. That the said FIR was filed due to some commercial transaction and mismatch of the payment, which has now been settled and no parties is having any complaint against each other related to the said agreement dated 16.12.2015. 4. That the contents of this affidavit have been read over and explained to me in detailed an I agreed with the same and this affidavit cum undertaking is made without any fear, coercion or undue influence from anyone and made with free consent. 5. I, therefore, pray that if impugned FIR being C.R. No.I/130/2016 dated 21.12.2016 for the offences u/s. 406, 420 and 120B of IPC came to be lodged at Ghatlodia Police Station is quashed/close and set aside, then undersign complainant have no objection. That, I Jay Kursija S/o. Sundardas Kursija, have given my free consent to withdraw the aforesaid FIR and I have no objection if the said FIR is quashed and set aside and close the matter in the interest of maintaining our business relations healthy and further undertakes to depose before any competent court and shall submit the same affidavit cum undertaking for withdrawal of the said complaint/FIR and quashing of the said complaint if submitted to any competent court.” 2. Taking into consideration the nature of the dispute and the fact that the parties have now amicably decided to live peacefully, no useful purpose would be served to allow the police to continue with the investigation of the said first information report. 3. In the result, this application is allowed. The first information report being I C.R. No. 130 of 2016 lodged before the Ghatlodiya Police Station, Ahmedabad City is hereby ordered to be quashed. All consequential proceedings arising from the same also stand terminated. Rule is made absolute. The Registry shall accept the Vakalatnama of Mr. Rishi O. Malik, the learned advocate appearing on behalf of the respondent No.2. Direct service is permitted.