IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr.MMO.No.No.63 of 2011. Date of Decision: 16.6.2011. _______________________________________________ Anil Kumar . ….Petitioner. Versus. State of H.P and another. ….Respondents. Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Dev Darshan Sud, Judge. Whether approved for reporting1? No. For the petitioner: :Mr.N.K.Bhardwaj, Advocate. For Respondent-1: :Mr. P.K.Sharma, Addl. Advocate General with Ms.Shubh Mahajan, Dy. Advocate General. For Respondent-2. Mr. Mehar Chand, Advocate. Dev Darshan Sud, J.(Oral). The petitioner has approached this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of F.I.R. No 240 dated 14.8.2010 for offences under Sections 452, 342, 504 and 506 I.P.C. 2. The allegation against the petitioner is that the complainant who was working as Project Attendant/Site Incharge in M/s Tefcil Breweries Ltd. Nargala, was threatened by the petitioner, who was the Officer Incharge of the United Bank of India for recovery of loan etc. and had forcibly taken over the possession of the factory. 3. Notice of this petition was issued to the respondents. The flash point for disagreement between the parties is Annexure:P-2 which is the possession notice issued under the Securitization and Whether reporters of the Local papers are allowed to see the judgment.yes. 2 Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Securities Interest Act, 2002 by the United Bank of India to M/s Tefcil Breweries Ltd.(Borrower), Sh. S.C. Chandha (Guarantor), Sh. R.K.Chadha (Guarantor) & Smt. B.B. Chadha (Guarantor) to repay the amount of Rs.3,86,33,921/-. Thereafter, the matter seems to have been litigating before the Debts Recovery Tribunal-III, Delhi, wherein a sum of Rs.1,24,00,000/- was directed to be deposited. It is undisputed before me that a sum of Rs.1,80,00,000/- has been paid to the United Bank of India. Two communications on record need to be noticed: “The Branch Manager, United Bank of India Nehru Place Branch 106-109, Ansal Tower First Floor 38, Nehru Place, New Delhi-110 019. Sub: Full and final settlement of Bank dues as on date under One Time Settlement (OTS). Dear Sir, Would you please refer to your letter No. NEP/ADV/TBL/1248/2010 dated 3.12.2010 on the captioned subject and find herewith attached Bankers Cheque No. 397926 of even date issued by The State Bank of India, Mansarover Garden, New Delhi-110015 Branch for a sum of Rs. 1,80,00,000/- (Rupees One Crore Eighty Lakhs only) as full & Final settlement of Bank dues as on date in order to liquidate up-to-date term loan liabilities including other charges, if any. You are now requested to release the documents mortgaged including registered lease deed executed by the Government of Himachal Pradesh and registered deed of property No. 11B/6 Pusa Road New Delhi stand in the name of Sh. S.C. Chandha after encashment of the Bankers Cheque as refer to above. You would kindly issue No Dues Certificate after completion of the deal in all respect and also withdraw the security guards at our premises at Nargala India Area, Samlana-Jwali in the District of Kangra Himachal Pradesh. As decided both the parties shall withdraw civil and criminal cases what so ever may it be in order to sum up the litigations. Yours Sincerely For TEFCIL Breweries Ltd. Encl:Bankers Cheque No.397926. Sd/- 3 R.K.Chadha, Joint Managing Director”. ___________________________________________________ “The Joint Managing Director, M/s Tefcil Brewries Limited Shivayam, D-25 Mansarovar Garden New Delhi-110 015. Re: Compromise settlement. Please refer to your letter dated 20th November 2010 for compromise settlement in the account. The competent authority of the bank has approved the compromise settlement towards full & final settlement of the account on following terms & conditions: Settled Amount: ` 180.00 lacs. Terms of payment: ` 180.00 lacs to be paid immediately by PO/DD Default Clause: Bank reserve the right to withdraw all relief and concessions under this approval and revert to the dues prior to settlement along with further interest thereon in the event of default in payment of settled dues or part thereof and / or non compliance of other terms & conditions. Release of security: Security (s) will be released only on realization of the settled dues and withdrawal of the case/suit, if any, filed against the bank. This letter is sent in duplicate. You are requested to return one copy duly signed in token of your acceptance of terms of settlement. Yours faithfully Sd/- Dy. General Manager”. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent does not dispute these facts. In this situation, I find that the continuation of the criminal proceedings would be nothing but an abuse of the process of law. 5. It is well settled that though a question purely of civil nature cannot be made the subject matter of criminal proceedings but at the same time, the Supreme Court in G. Sagar Suri and another Vs. 4 State of U.P. and others, (2000) 2 SCC 636 and Indian Oil Corporation Vs. NEPC India Ltd. and others, (2006) 6 SCC 736 and Iridium India Telecom Limited Vs. Motorola Incorporated and others, (2011) 1 SCC 74 has held that where disputes of a civil nature may also contain ingredients of criminal offences and if so, will have to be tried as criminal offences. 6. In R.P.Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, AIR 1960 S.C. 866, Pepsi Foods Limited Vs. Special Judicial Magistrate, (1998) 5 SCC 749 and B.S.Joshi and others Vs. State of Haryana and another, (2003) 4 SCC 675, the Court has held that F.I.R. can be quashed if it is an abuse of the process of law and when no case is made out. 7. It is by now well settled that this Court can exercise its inherent jurisdiction where continuation of the proceedings would be futile. The petition is allowed. It is directed that F.I.R. No 240 dated 14.8.2010 is quashed and set aside and all proceedings subsequent thereto are also quashed. (Dev Darshan Sud), Judge. June 16, 2011(R)