WP(Crl)No.558/2010 Page 1 of 4 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI W.P.(CRL) 558/2010 Date of Decision : 19.7.2010 IN THE MATTER OF SIVALINGAM NADESAN ..... Petitioner Through : Mr. Kapil Sankhla, Adv. with petitioner in person. Versus STATE ..... Respondent Through : Mr. Saleem Ahmed,ASC for the State with SI Sunil Kumar, PS Dwarka. Mr. Rajendran, proxy counsel for Mr. Rajesh Kr. Verma, Adv. for R-2 with Mr. Siva Rama Krishna, Authorized Signatory of R-2. CORAM HON'BLE MS.JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI 1. Whether Reporters of Local papers may No be allowed to see the Judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? No 3. Whether the judgment should be No reported in the Digest? HIMA KOHLI, J. ( O R A L ) 1. The present writ petition is filed by the petitioner under Section 482 Cr.P.C. praying inter alia for quashing of the FIR No.11/2010 lodged by the respondent No.2 against the petitioner under Section 420 IPC with PS Sector 23, Dwarka. 2. It is stated in the petition that in the year 2001, the petitioner had joined the complainant company as a Technical Director. However, in July 2001, the petitioner sent his resignation to the WP(Crl)No.558/2010 Page 2 of 4 respondent No.2 company and being a citizen of Malaysia, left for Malaysia on the same date after surrendering his employment Visa to the immigration authorities at IGI Airport. Thereafter, on an apprehension that some persons extended threats to the college where his son was studying in Delhi, the petitioner lodged a complaint with the Police Commissioner, Delhi Police on 31.12.2009. In the meantime, the respondent No.2 is also stated to have filed a complaint against the petitioner on 11.1.2010, which has culminated in the aforesaid FIR No.11/2010. 3. The parties state that in the meantime, with the help of friends and well wishers, they have arrived at a negotiated settlement, terms and conditions of which are contained in the Compromise Deed 10.7.2010 enclosed with the paper book. In the aforesaid settlement, the parties have stated that upon making inquiries, they have realized that neither party is at fault and that there has been some misunderstanding between them at the instance of some mischief makers and that neither party wants/wishes to proceed further with any case against each other. 4. The petitioner is present in the Court and so is Mr. Siva Rama Krishna, Authorized Signatory of the respondent No.2 company. The Board Resolution, authorizing Mr. Siva Rama Krishna to confirm all the acts of the respondent No.2, is dated 3.11.2009 and is enclosed with the Index of documents dated 16.7.2010. Both the parties confirm having entered into the aforesaid settlement of their free will and volition. WP(Crl)No.558/2010 Page 3 of 4 5. Status Report dated 19.7.2010 is handed over by the learned ASC for the State, which is taken on the record. Learned ASC for the State confirms that both the parties have arrived at a negotiated settlement by way of a Compromise Deed 10.7.2010, a copy of which is also enclosed with the Status Report. 6. Learned ASC for the State submits that the State has no objection to the prayer made in the petition being allowed. However, he submits that in view of the fact that the respondent No.2 company has put into motion the legal machinery of the State, which has resulted in incurring of unnecessary expenditure and wastage of time, it be put to terms for seeking the relief in the present petition. 7. In view of the aforesaid statement made by the parties and the compromise arrived at between them, as reduced into writing in a Compromise Deed dated 10.7.2010, and also in view of the fact that the prayer made in the present petition is not opposed by the learned ASC for the State, there appears no legal impediment in accepting the compromise, which is stated to have been arrived at between the parties of their own free will and volition and without any undue influence or coercion from any quarters whatsoever. 8. The petition is allowed in view of the aforesaid compromise arrived at between the parties. Parties shall remain bound by the terms and conditions of the settlement. FIR No.11/2010 and all proceedings arising out therefrom stand quashed, subject to payment of costs of Rs.20,000/- by the respondent No.2/company to be deposited in the name of the Registrar General of this Court, WP(Crl)No.558/2010 Page 4 of 4 towards the Juvenile Justice Fund, within a period of two weeks. Copy of proof of deposit of the aforesaid costs shall be furnished to the learned ASC for the State within two weeks. The petition is disposed of. File be consigned to the record room. HIMA KOHLI,J JULY 19, 2010 sk