JAI BHAGWAN Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this petition under Section 482 Criminal Procedure Code petitioners 1 to 5 are seeking quashing of FIR Nos. 387/97,565/97, 16/98, 498/98, 50/98 under Sections 406/420/120-R Indian Penal Code P.S.Desh Bandhu Gupta Road, Delhi registered againsi them.

(2.) It is alleged that about 400 employees working in the DCM received compensation, on its closure in March, 1989. Petitioner' No. 1 Jai Bhagwan Singh, representing himself as an agent Induced the employees to deposit amounts in the funds of the DCM with the promise that each depositor sha]l receive payment at fixed intervals along with interest. On the basis of these inducements workers deposited their hard earned money. It is alleged that in August 1996 petitioners floated six finance companies and diverted deposits of the investors in the said companies without their knowledge or consent.

(3.) Cheques issued to the depositors were dishonoured. On the complaint lodged by the depositors, severel criminal cases were registered against the petitioners. Petitioner No. 1 Surrendered and was bailed out on 22.9.1997. Petitioners 3 and 5 were stated to be in Jail on the date of filing of the petition. Depositors formed the action committee to make efforts to get back their deposits. Subsequently, this association appears to have been registered as "Delhi Naitik Nagrik Parishad (Regd.)". Affidavits of some of its members have also been filed stating that they have authorised petitioners 6 and 7 to enter into compromise on their behalf. Initially petitioners 6 and 7 filed a writ (Crl W. No. 754/97) for transfer of investigations to CRT. The same was not pressed because of the compromise. It is alleged that on 4.3.1998 the accused No.1, Jai Bhagwan entered into an agreement, with the said representatives. As per the compromise accused persons agreed to pay 50% of the amount of the depositors to them, within three months, by selling their properties and balance 50% after the interval of eight months in three instalments. On the basis of this compromise accused persons, and investors' representatives, filed this joint petition seeking quashing of the above noted five FIRs. Prayer reads :-