2021 (7) TMI 1405 - HC - Indian Laws

Dishonour of Cheque - compoundable offence or not - amicable settlement of disputes - trial for offence under Sections 406 409 420 506(i) r/w 34 IPC - HELD THAT - In this case the victims handed over money to the 2nd respondent/LW1 directly to get job from the Transport Department and some through LW2 LW3 LW4 LW5 and LW6. All these persons categorically stated that along with money they handed over the Interview Call Letter. The 2nd respondent/LW1 stated that he had contact with A4 who represented to him that he knew A3 the Personal Assistant of A1 the former Transport Minister. LW2 to LW6 handed over the money to the 2nd respondent/LW1 and other aspirants have never met the 2nd respondent/LW1. In order to confirm the job the 2nd respondent/LW1 went along with A4 and met A3 who received the money and promised that within a week the appointment order will be issued - When the cash balance were verified with the bank it was found that no sufficient balance in the account of A4. In this case the 2nd respondent/LW1 and A4 are the persons who had been in constant touch with each other during the transactions and involved themselves in the process of getting appointment orders. As regards A1 and A2 are concerned they had given assurance that the appointment order would be issued to the victims but there is no material to show that A1 and A2 directly involved in the transactions. The other victims namely LW7 to LW11 did not handover the cash to the accused seeking job. It was to LW1. Further in this case the appointment orders or any other documents in respect of the transaction were not produced. Hence the allegations seems to be general and vague in nature. The case is still at the stage of trial. By passage of time the parties have decided to bury their hatchet and compromised the dispute amicably among themselves. This Court enquired both the parties and is satisfied that the parties have come to an amicable settlement between themselves. Thus no useful purpose would be achieved by keeping the above case pending. Thus no useful purpose will be served in this case even though the offences involved are not compoundable in nature - petition allowed.

Summary

Issues:
Quashing of criminal proceedings in C.C.No.25 of 2021 related to allegations of cheating and misappropriation in securing jobs in the Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation.

Analysis:
The petitioner, the 3rd accused in C.C.No.25 of 2021, is facing trial for offenses under Sections 406, 409, 420, 506(i) r/w 34 IPC. The case involves allegations that victims paid substantial sums for securing jobs, but the promised employment did not materialize. Accused individuals, including the petitioner, are accused of cheating and misappropriation of funds.

The defense argued that the petitioner merely collected consultancy charges and provided hopeful assurances based on his position. It was contended that the victims were not qualified for the job selection process, and the petitioner had only received consultancy charges. The defense further claimed that the petitioner faced financial difficulties, leading to delays in repayment. A settlement was reached in 2019, with all victims repaid, but the case continued due to political rivalry and animosity.

The victims, through video conference, confirmed the resolution of issues with the accused and expressed no objection to quashing the proceedings. The victims had handed over money directly or through intermediaries for job procurement, but the promised appointments did not materialize. The victims confirmed the compromise and settlement with the accused.

Considering the amicable settlement between the parties and the lack of utility in continuing the case, the Court exercised its jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.25 of 2021. The decision was based on guidelines from previous Supreme Court judgments and the satisfaction that the parties had amicably resolved their dispute.

In conclusion, the Criminal Original Petition was allowed, and the proceedings in C.C.No.25 of 2021 were quashed against all accused. The Court emphasized the importance of amicable settlements and the exercise of caution in such matters, leading to the closure of the connected Miscellaneous Petition.