LAWS(KAR)-2012-10-150

H.S. BEDI SON OF LATE I.S. BEDI Vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER WHITE FIELD POLICE STATION BANGALORE AND OTHERS

Decided On October 18, 2012
H.S. Bedi Son Of Late I.S. Bedi Appellant
V/S
State Of Karnataka By The Station House Officer White Field Police Station Bangalore Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN these petitions the petitioners have prayed to quash the order dated 25.02.2012 in PCR No. 68/2012, FIR dated 27.03.2012 in Cr. No. 81/2012 and for a writ of mandamus directing respondents 3 to 5 to return a sum of Rs. 1.96 Crores and other reliefs. Petitioner no. 1 is the husband of petitioner no. 2 and petitioner no. 3 is their daughter. Petitioner no. 1 is the Managing Director and the petitioner no. 2 is the Director of a company called IDEB BUILDCON Private Ltd. According to respondents 3 to 5, petitioners in the month of April 2008 induced them to invest huge sum of money to an extent of Rs. 7 crores plus and guaranteed monthly returns to the tune of nearly Rs. 8.89 lakhs. Thereafter the petitioners avoided their liability with a criminal intention to cheat the respondents. In the circumstances, the respondents lodged a complaint with the police and the same came to be registered in Cr. No. 215/2010 for the offences punishable under Sections 406 and 420 IPC. Aggrieved by this registration of crime against the petitioners, they approached this court in W.P. No. 31454 -456/2010 to quash the proceedings in Cr. No. 215/2010. During the pendency of W.P. No. 31454 -456/2010, there came to be a settlement between the parties as per settlement deed dated 11.11.2010. In terms of this settlement deed, the petitioners issued six postdated cheques towards discharge of their liability. Accordingly, the respondents filed a memo dated 30.11.2010 in W.P. No. 31454 -456/2010. This court in terms of the memo disposed W.P. No. 31454 -456/2010 vide order dated 5.1.2011 with an observation as under:

(2.) AFTER the disposal of W.P. No. 31454 -456/2010 the respondents presented the cheques issued by the petitioners for encashment and they came to be dishonoured for the reason of insufficient funds. Consequently, the respondents filed private complaints against the petitioners under Section 200 Cr. P.C. for the offences punishable under Sections 138 NI Act in PCR No. 10988/2011, PCR No. 10989/2011 and PCR No. 10990/2011 and they are pending adjudication.

(3.) HEARD arguments on both the side and perused the entire petition papers.