(1.) This petition under Sec. 482 of the Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioners who are accused in FIR No.1220/2014, registered under Ss. 420/468/471 read with 34 IPC, at Police Station Nand Nagri, Delhi, seeking quashing of the said FIR and all proceedings emanating therefrom.
(2.) The contention of Mr. Abhinav Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioners, is that the dispute between the parties, namely, the petitioners and the complainant/respondent No.3 was fundamentally a civil dispute and as held in Paramjeet Batra Vs. State of Uttarakhand and Ors., (2013) 11 SCC 673, when a civil remedy was available, the court ought to quash the criminal proceedings to prevent abuse of process of court. It is further submitted that the FIR has been belatedly registered after a delay of seven years. Reliance in this regard has been placed on the judgement of the Gujarat High Court in Madhubhai Virjibhai Patel Vs. State of Gujarat and others [Order dtd. 27/9/2019 in R/Criminal Misc. Application No.7023/2009]. It is stated that a civil suit filed by the petitioners against the complainant/respondent no. 3 was already pending before the learned Additional District Judge, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi. It is also submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the law did not permit a second complaint on the same facts and therefore, the FIR registered against the petitioners was liable to be quashed. Reliance in this regard has been placed on the judgement of the Calcutta High Court in Anwarul Islam v. State of West Bengal, 1996 SCC OnLine Cal 111.
(3.) Relying on the judgment of the Supreme Court in Lalita Kumari Vs. Govt. of U.P. and others, (2014) 2 SCC 1, it was argued by the learned counsel for the petitioners that on account of the delay in filing the complaint and this being the second complaint, a preliminary inquiry had to be conducted by the police before the FIR was registered and the police had failed to conduct this preliminary inquiry, thus, vitiating the registration of the FIR.