9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (1) TMI 1300X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ay Bansal vs. Gangotri Enterprises Ltd. & Ors.” and the order issuing summons and the proceedings emanating therefrom are quashed. - CRL.M.C. 2011/2016 and Crl. M.A. Nos.8503/2016 (Stay) and 11546/2016 (Exemption from personal appearance) - - - Dated:- 19-1-2017 - MS. MUKTA GUPTA J. Petitioners Represented by: Mr. Dayan Krishnan, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Subhiksh Vasudev and Ms. Akashi Lodha, Advocates. Respondent Represented by: Mr. Rajesh Mahindru, Advocate. MUKTA GUPTA, J. (ORAL) 1. By the present petition the petitioners pray for quashing of complaint case No. NI-1080/14 titled Sanjay Bansal vs. Gangotri Enterprises Ltd. Ors. and the order dated 16th January, 2015 issuing summons and the proceedings emanating therefrom. 2. In the complaint the respondent alleged that as per the Memorandum of Understanding dated 7th December, 2007 the respondent No.2 was to supply bitumen/LDO, Bitumen emulsion on various dates as per the demands by the petitioners at different sites. In lieu of the material supplied the petitioners handed over two post-dated cheques bearing Nos. 038531 and 038532 for a sum of ₹ 25 lakhs each as guarantee against the supplies. It w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . Complaint was transferred to different Courts. Finally on 19th February, 2016, bailable warrants were issued against the respondent Nos. 2 to 5 resulting in the filing of the present petition. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners has drawn attention of this Court to the Memorandum of Agreement dated 7th October, 2013, cheque No. 344158 drawn on Axis Bank Ltd. for a sum of ₹ 50 lakhs and the Bank statement of the petitioners showing transfer of the amount of ₹ 50 lakhs to that of the respondent. 5. On appearance before the learned Trial Court for cancellation of the non-bailable warrants issued, learned counsel for the petitioners drew the attention of the Court towards payment of ₹ 50 lakhs and the Settlement Agreement noting that the complaint would be withdrawn. The learned Trial Court posed a query to the learned counsel for the respondent who denied that his father signed the Settlement Agreement however, admitted his signatures on both the copies of the Settlement Agreement. Despite noting the same, the Court was of the view that since there was no chances of the settlement, the matter was required to be proceeded as per law. 6. Thus the issue be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... an order of a Magistrate within the purview of Section 155(2) of the Code. (3) Where the uncontroverted allegations made in the FIR or complaint and the evidence collected in support of the same do not disclose the commission of any offence and make out a case against the accused. (4) Where, the allegations in the FIR do not constitute a cognizable offence but constitute only a non-cognizable offence, no investigation is permitted by a police officer without an order of a Magistrate as contemplated under Section 155(2) of the Code. (5) Where the allegations made in the FIR or complaint are so absurd and inherently improbable on the basis of which no prudent person can ever reach a just conclusion that there is sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused. (6) Where there is an express legal bar engrafted in any of the provisions of the Code or the concerned Act (under which a criminal proceeding is instituted) to the institution and continuance of the proceedings and/or where there is a specific provision in the Code or the concerned Act, providing efficacious redress for the grievance of the aggrieved party. (7) Where a criminal proceeding is manif ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r M/s. Gangotri Enterprises Limited For M/s Petroleum Oils Chemicals Ltd. Sd/- AJEET PANDEY Director Sd/- SANJAY BANSAL Proprietor Witness: Witness: MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT This Memorandum of Agreement signed and agreed on this day of 7th October 2013 between M/s Gangotri Enterprises Limited, B-158, Sector-A, Mahanagar, Lucknow-226006 through its Director Shri Ajeet Pandey (hereinafter referred to as GEL) and M/s Petroleum Oils Chemicals Ltd, 31/35, Main Rohtak Road Punjabi Bagh (West) New Delhi Through its Proprietor Shri Sanjay Bansal (hereinafter referred to as POCL). It is understood that POCL has been issued two security cheques no.038531 038532 for ₹ 25,00,000/- each drawn on Axis Bank Ltd, New Delhi. POCL has presented the cheques and the same has returned as the account has been closed. M/s POCL has filed a case no. 4868/1/12 U/s 138 NI Act at Tis Hazari Courts, New Delhi against M/s GEL its Directors. It is solemnly resolved between GEL POCL that M/s GEL has now issue ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
