JUDGEMENT
B.S.WALIA,J. -
(1.)Case is being taken up for hearing through Video Conferencing due to Covid-19 pandemic.
(2.)Prayer in the petition under Sec. 439 Cr.P.C. is for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.244 dtd. 20/8/2020,
registered under Ss. 323, 406, 420, 506, 370, 384 IPC and Sec. 24, Immigration Act, 1983, at Police Station Nissing, District Karnal.
(3.)Learned counsel contends that the petitioner introduced the complainant to the main accused, Vikas Kumar Mishra and Anupam
Kumar for sending his son abroadand the complainant paid,
Rs.2,10,000.00 to the petitioner and Rs.2,00,000.00 to the co-accused, who
sent the complainant's son to Vietnam where Vikash Kumar Mishra also
reached and snatched 12500 Euros i.e. Rs.10,00,000.00from the
complainant's son, total Rs.14,10,000.00, that the petitioner gave a cheque
of Rs.4,00,000.00 as security to the complainant but the same bounced on
presentation and in respect of which a complaint under Sec. 138,
Negotiable Instruments Act, has been filed. Learned counsel contends
that CRM-M-16018-2021, has been filed by the main accused, Vikas
Kumar Mishra, for quashing of FIR on the basis of compromise of the
matter with the complainant, factum of compromise was admitted by
counsel appearing on behalf of the complainant whereupon while
adjourning the matter to 12/7/2021, parties were directed to put in
appearance before the learned Illaqa Magistrate/Duty Magistrate for
recording of their statements in terms of the compromise. Order dtd.
9/4/2021, passed in CRM-M-16018-2021, is reproduced as below:-
"Case is being taken up for hearing through Video Conferencing due to Covid-19 pandemic. Prayer in the petition under Sec. 482 Cr.P.C. is for quashing of FIR No.244 dtd. 20/8/2020, registered under Ss. 323, 406, 420, 506, 370, 384 IPC and 24 Immigration Act 1983 at Police Station Nissing District Karnal along with all consequential proceedings emanating therefrom, on the basis of affidavit/compromise, Annexure P/2 dtd. 1/4/2021 as well as the decision of Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and another, 2012 (4) RCR (Crl.) 543. Notice of motion.
Mr.Vivek Chauhan, Addl. AG, Haryana accepts notice on behalf of respondent No. 1 and states that he does not wish to file reply in view of amicable settlement of the dispute amongst the parties vide affidavit / compromise, Annexure P/2 dtd. 1/4/2021 as well as the judgment cited by learned counsel for the petitioners. Mr. Pardeep Panwar, learned counsel puts in appearance and accepts notice on behalf of respondent No.2 and 3 and states that he has no objection, if the aforementioned FIR and all consequential proceedings emanating therefrom are quashed in view of affidavit/compromise, Annexure P/2 dtd. 1/4/2021 as also the judgment cited by learned counsel for the petitioners.
Accordingly, in view of the position as noted above, the parties are directed to put in appearance before the learned Illaqa Magistrate/ Duty Magistrate concerned for recording of their statements in terms of affidavit/compromise, Annexure P/2 dtd. 1/4/2021on 11/5/2021 or any other date thereafter convenient.
Report regarding genuineness of the compromise as also whether any other person(s) has/ have been nominated as accused and whether any person(s) has / have been declared proclaimed offender, whether challan has been filed, whether there is any cross case etc. be filed before this Court by the next date. List on 12/7/2021. Reply, if any, be filed in the meantime."