RAMESH JAIN Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short 'The Code'), has been preferred for quashment of First Information Report bearing crime No.293/2007, registered at police station - Central Kothwali, District - Indore, against the applicants for offence punishable under Sections 420 , 467 , 468 , 406 , 418 , 34 of IPC and the consequential proceedings in S.T. No.271/2009 pending before the 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Indore.

(2.) The brief facts relevant to the case are that respondent No.2 one of the Directors of Chandra Prabhu Homes Pvt Ltd. Company filed a complaint at Police Station Central Kothwali, Indore alleging that applicants were Directors of Chandra Prabhu Homes Pvt Ltd. Company (herein after referred to as 'Chandra Prabhu Homes') having its registered Office at 16, Ware House Road, Siyaganj, Indore, dealing with real estate business of purchasing agricultural land, developing colonies and selling plots in hire purchase basis to individuals. However due to their misappropriation of accounts in the Chandra Prabhu Homes, applicants were removed from the post of Directors. It is further alleged that the applicants prepared forged documents, receipts in the name of Sangitha Jain, Nita Jain, Manoj Gupta, Arun Jain and Dharmendra Gupta and misappropriated Chandra Prabhu Homes funds. On the basis of which police registered FIR bearing crime 293/2007, against the applicants for offence punishable under Sections 420 , 467 , 468 , 406 , 418 , 34 of IPC. During investigation applicants were arrested on 27/12/2007. On completion of investigation, challan has been filed before the Judicial Magistrate, Indore, who committed the case to the Court of Sessions for trial.

(3.) During the pendency of the trial, on the basis of amicable settlement arrived at between applicants and respondent No.2, compromise applications u/S 320 of 'The Code' was filed before the trial Court. The learned Sessions Court took the application on record, however, it was held that the said application shall be considered at the time of final decision and the case was fixed for recording prosecution witnesses on 14/02/2019 and 15/02/2019, hence the present petition.