ATUL CHIBBER Vs. STATE OF J&K

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Through the medium of instant petition, petitioner invokes inherent jurisdiction of this Court under section 561-A Cr.P.C. for quashment of FIR No.69/2016 dated 06.10.2016 registered in Police Station, Crime Branch, Jammu under Sections 420, 406, 465, 466, 467,468, 506 RPC.

(2.) In the petition, it is stated that the petitioner and respondent No.4 were business partners and have started the business in the name of M/s Orbit Products at Phase-II IGC Samba for manufacturing of white disinfectants toilet soap, naphthalene balls and other material. The terms of partnership were reduced into writing and the partnership deed was registered in the Court of Sub-Registrar, Samba on 01.07.2013. It is further stated that the petitioner and respondent No.4 jointly purchased a plot of one kanal at IGC Phase-II Samba from one P.C.Gupta vide Agreement to sell dated 05.08.2013. They had some misunderstanding during the transactions and as such the petitioner was being harassed by SHO Police Station Channi Himmat by conducting raids at his residence and also sent police to harass the petitioner, thereafter filed a bail application on 19.07.2014 in the Court of learned Sessions Judge, Jammu and obtained anticipatory bail. Respondent No.4 stopped the harassment and again started interfering into the business and residential property of the petitioner as such he was constrained to file another bail application on 15.10.2014 wherein the interim bail was granted and SHO Police Station Channi Himmat was directed to file the detailed report. On 17.10.2014 a report was submitted by the SHO Police Station Channi Himmat wherein it was stated that there is no case registered against the petitioner and on this report the learned 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Jammu dismissed the bail application having been rendered infructuous. Thereafter petitioner filed a Civil Suit in which the Court of learned 2nd Addl. Munsiff issued notice to respondents. However, respondent No.4/defendant did not choose to appear in the Court but stopped harassing the petitioner. The petitioner had a business transaction with respondent No.4 and some payments were made to her through the Bank accounts, cheques and in cash. It is further contended that the petitioner was put to such harassment by the police as well as private goons that he has to leave the State due to threat to his life and petitioner could not settle at Jammu so as to reconcile the account with respondent No.4. In the meanwhile, respondent No.4 approached Crime Branch to get the case registered and the Crime Branch Jammu never called or associated the petitioner with the preliminary inquiry, however, petitioner came to know regarding the pendency of the case in Crime Branch when a news item appeared in all the news papers regarding registration of FIR No.69/2016 in Police Station, Crime Branch Jammu under Sections 420, 406, 465, 466, 467,468, 506 RPC.

(3.) It is also contended that respondent No.4 and the petitioner have reconciled their accounts and the petitioner has paid an amount of Rs. 6.00 lacs to respondent No.4 in full and final settlement of her claims against the petitioner and the compromise deed has been executed between the petitioner and the respondent No.4 in presence of counsels of both the parties and respondent No.4 has also withdrawn the two cases filed by her in the Court learned Additional District Judge and in Munsiff Forest Magistrate, Jammu.