* + Ofo IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CRL.M.C. 3140/2011 CHELSEA MILLS & ANR ..... Petitioners Through Mr. Sanjiv Bahl, Advocate. versus STATE & ANR ..... Respondents CORAM: Through Mr. Manoj Ohri, APP for the State with SI Mukesh Balyan, PS IGI Airport. Mr. Vikas Kakkar, Adv. for R-2 along Mr. Satish Kumar Dubey, authorized person on behalf ofR-2 in person. HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA ORDER 22.09.2011 Though the matter was adjourned for today, however it was inadvertently typed in the order sheet of 20th September, 2011 that the matter is adjourned for 29th September, 2011. Since the matter was adjourned for today, the same is taken up for hearing. Learned APP for the State has filed a letter dated 20th September, 2011 of the Canara Bank, International Banking Branch, Kirti Nagar, New Delhi -110015 addressed to the SHO, PS IGI Airport, New Delhi wherein it has been stated that the bank has not incurred any loss in the transaction and CRL.M.C. 314012011 page 1 of 3 ..'.. ; ··: c. ;-( I. 1-' --..'. :----.- - '- Signing Date:27.08.2024 16:57:17 Certify that the digital and physical file have been compared and the digital data is as per the physical file and no page is missing. Signature Not Verified ! no dues are outstanding to it from the parties. Thus, the matter relates to the dispute between the parties. The letter filed by learned APP is taken on record and is marked as Exh.-A. '---'., I This is a petition for quashing of FIR No. 96/2011 under Sections 420/467/468/471!120B IPC registered at PS IGI Airport, New Delhi on the ! complaint of Respondent No.2. Mr. Satish Kumar Dubey, authorized representative of Respondent No.2 is present in Court today. The authorization in his favour has been filed as Annexure R-1 along with an affidavit. Mr. Dubey- states that the name of Mr. A.K. Jain has been advertently mentioned in the abovementioned FIR and that there is no A.K. Jain involved in the : transaction. Only 2 persons i.e. Mr. M.K. Jain i.e. Petitioner No.2 and Mr. Anuj Bhatia i.e. Petitioner No.3 on behalf of their company i.e. Petitioner i No.1 are involved in the transaction resulting in the· abovementioned FIR. He further states that the petitioners and Respondent No.2 have arrived at a --'- settlement and in view therefore, Respondent No.2 does not want to pursue the abovementioned FIR and the proceedings pursuant thereto. Respondent No.2 has already received a sum of US $70,000/- by way of bank draft in terms of the settlement. CRL.M.C. 314012011 page2of3 In view of the fact that the parties have amicably resolved their differences and no useful purpose will be served in continuance of the proceedings, rather the same would create further acrimony between them, it would be appropriate to quash the abovementioned FIR and the proceedings pursuant thereto. Consequently, FIR No. 96/2011 under Sections 420/467/468/471/120B IPC registered at PS IGI Airport, New Delhi and proceedings pursuant thereto are hereby quashed. Parties, who have been identified by their respective counsel and the Investigating Officer, have signed this order sheet in acknowledgment of their statements before this Court. The petition is disposed of. SEPTEMBER 22, 2011 Vkm .) flh< f( i RuA-> ... ,, page 3 of 3 - - C7 ... ")/lo3/; /to '· -.., fAr rt>{ V;V- f'...(J ;;)_ ( (-"- Pe)_v; 0' i?'J'v? - -·-'-·