KEWAL KUMAR Vs. DEEP KUMAR GUPTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a petition under Section 482, CrPC, filed by the accused-petitioners, seeking quashment of the criminal complaint, copy Annexure P1, under Sections 420/468/471/379/120B, IPC, filed by the complainant-respondent, Deep Kumar Gupta, against the accused-petitioners and their co-accused "Mr. Goel", Manager, Central Bank of India, Batala, and all subsequent proceedings taken thereon.

(2.) IN the present petition under Section 482, CrPC, filed by the accused- petitioners, it was alleged that Rajesh Kumar, son of Kewal Kumar, petitioner, was married with Smt. Upma, daughter of Deep Kumar Gupta, respondent, in the year 1984. It was alleged that said Rajesh Kumar died on 24.2.1992, leaving a Will, resulting in property dispute between the family members regarding the succession to the properties of Rajesh Kumar, deceased. It was alleged that Smt. Upma wd/o Rajesh Kumar and daughter of Deep Kumar Gupta, filed a criminal complaint under Sections 320/406/379, IPC, on 5.6.1992, copy Annexure P2, against the present petitioners and their co-accused, Smt. Sunita, wife of petitioner No. 3, Ravinder Kumar, levelling allegations of cheating, mis- appropriation and theft, etc. It was alleged that subsequently, Smt Upma Gupta and petitioner No. 1, Kewal Kumar Gupta, entered into an agreement dated 22.6.1992, copy Annexure P3, which was signed not only by Smt. Upma Gupta and Kewal Kumar Gupta, but was also signed by Deep Kumar, father of Smt. Upma Gupta. It was alleged that in pursuance of the said agreement, receipt dated 2.7.1992, copy Annexure P4, was executed by Smt. Upma Gupta, which was also signed by her father, Deep Kumar. It was alleged that as a result thereof, Smt. Upma Gupta did not pursue the criminal complaint, copy Annexure P2, which was filed by her against the petitioners and accordingly, on 6.9.1992, the said complaint was dismissed by the learned Magistrate for want of prosecution. It was alleged that subsequently, in respect of FDRs, etc., lying in the Bank, Smt. Upma Gupta, on 14.6.1993, filed a suit for mandatory injunction in the Civil Court at Batala, against the Central Bank of India. A copy of the plaint was attached as Annexure P5. It was alleged that in order to harass the petitioners, Deep Kumar Gupta, father of Smt. Upma Gupta, filed the present criminal complaint, copy Annexure P1, on 10.6.1993 on the same facts. It was alleged that the learned Magistrate had summoned the petitioners as accused in the said complaint, after recording preliminary evidence. It was alleged that the complaint, copy Annexure P1, was based on facts exclusively concerning Upma and these facts formed the basis of the complaint, copy Annexure P2. It was alleged that Smt. Upma Gupta got the compliant dismissed, in view of the compromise and concealing this fact that her father, Deep Kumar, filed the present complaint, even though he himself was a party to the compromise, entered into by his daughter, Upma Gupta. It was alleged that this would amount to abuse of process of Court.

(3.) I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the record carefully.