High Court · 2025

2024. The allegations in the FIR were that the accused had promised that they would get the informant and persons known to him employment on the payment of certain amounts. It was a further allegation in that FIR that the first informant had paid to the accused certain amounts. It was stated that Ravindra Kumar and Manveer were paid Rs.1,50,000/- each. It was also stated in the FIR that the accused had stated that upon getting the joining letter, the first informant had to pay a further sum of Rs.3,90,000. When the first informant had incessantly waited for the joining letter and when the same was not forthcoming, the FIR which gave rise to case crime No. 0320 of 2024 was lodged on 17.06.2024 by the first informant, Deena Nath Sharma. Thereafter, there was again an FIR lodged on 30.08.2024 by Ravindra Kumar, who was an accused in the earlier first information report, wherein the accused persons were Arvind Kumar Maurya, and Deena Nath Sharma. In this FIR again the allegation was that Arvind Kumar Maurya and Deena Nath had taken certain amounts for getting jobs for Ravindra Kumar and for his acquaintances.

2. Arvind Kumar filed a writ petition, being Writ Petition No. 17438 of 2024, and Deena Nath filed another writ petition, being Writ Petition No. 19800 of 2024. When the Writ Petition No. 17438 of 2024 was filed, this Court passed the following order on

21.10.2024: "1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State respondents and Sri Aushim Luthra, learned counsel for respondent no.4.

2. The petitioner, by means of this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, has invoked the inherent jurisdiction of this Court with prayer to quash the impugned First Information Report dated 30.08.2024 registered as Case Crime No.0452 of 2024 under Section 420, 406, 467, 468, 471, 504, 506 IPC, P.S. Bahjoi, District Sambhal (Bheem Nagar).

3. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that the present matter relates to dispute between the parties qua transaction of money, which may be amicably settled by way of mediation and conciliation. Learned counsel for the petitioners states that there is every possibility of mediation in the present case, therefore, the matter may be referred to the Mediation and Conciliation Centre of this Court.

4. In view of the above, it is directed that petitioner shall deposit a sum of Rs.50,000/- within a week from today with the Mediation Centre of this Court, out of which Rs.5,000/- shall be paid to respondent no.4, on the date fixed, for his appearance before the Mediation Centre and Rs.5000/- shall be retained by the Mediation Centre as mediation fee and the rest amount of Rs.40,000/- shall remain with the Mediation Centre and shall only be released after final settlement of the matter.

5. The matter is remitted to the Mediation Centre with the direction that after deposit of aforesaid amount, by the petitioner, it shall issue notice to the parties fixing some date for mediation and shall make all possible efforts to conclude the mediation and conciliation proceedings expeditiously, preferably within a period of three months.

6. List after expiry of aforesaid period before the appropriate Bench along with the report of Mediation Centre.

7. Till the next date of listing, no coercive action shall be taken against the petitioner in the above mentioned case.

8. It is made clear that in case there occurs default by the petitioner either in depositing the amount or in appearing before the Mediation Centre on the date fixed, the interim order shall cease to operate and the Mediation Centre shall immediately communicate with the office which in turn shall list the case within a week before the appropriate Bench for passing orders in the matter. "

2. Before the Mediation Centre on 05.12.2024 the mediators drew a certain settlement agreement which is being reproduced here asunder:- "1) Disputes and differences had arisen between the Parties hereto and Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 17438 of 2024 were filed before the Hon'ble High Court. 2) The matter was referred to mediation / conciliation vide order dated 21.10.2024 passed by bench of Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J. and Hon'ble Prashant Kumar, J. 3) The parties agreed that Ms. Subhash Rathi and Mr. Shashi Bhushan, Advocates would act as their Conciliators/Mediators, in the Mediation Case No. 4113/2024. 4) Several joint and separate meetings were held during the process of Conciliation/Mediation on 28.11.2024 and 05.12.2024, the parties have with the assistance of the Mediators/Conciliators voluntarily arrived at an amicable solution resolving the above mentioned disputes and differences. 5) The dispute between the parties is regarding payment of Rs. 1,85,000/- (Rs. One Lakh Eighty Five Thousand) due against the petitioner- Arvind Kumar Maurya. Out of Rs.1,85,000, (Rs. One Lakh Eighty Five Thousand only) due against the petitioner, an amount of Rs. 40,000/- (Rs. Forty Thousand only) has already been paid by the petitioner to the respondent no. 4, the respondent no. 4 acknowledges the receipt of the same. However, the remaining payment i.e., Rs. 1,45,000/- (Rs. One Lakh Forty Five Thousand only) still remained unpaid. This gave rise to above mentioned Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 17438 of 2024. 6) The parties hereto confirm and declare that they have voluntarily and of their own free will arrived at this Settlement Agreement in the presence of the Mediators/Conciliators. 7) The following settlement has been arrived at between the Parties hereto:- a) That now, both the parties have settled their dispute on the condition that the petitioner Arvind Kumar Maurya shall pay an amount of Rs.1,10,000/- (Rs. One Lakh Ten Thousand only) to the respondent no. 4 Ravindra Kumar by way of demand draft. b) That today i.e., 05.12.2024, the petitioner Arvind Kumar Maurya has handed over a demand draft no. 486273 dated 04.12.2024 for Rs. 40,000/- (Rs. Forty Thousand only) drawn on State Bank of India in favour of Ravindra Kumar (respondent no. 4) and he has acknowledged the receipt of the same. c) That it has been agreed between the parties that on the next date fixed i.e. 19.12.2024, the petitioner- Arvind Kumar Maurya shall bring a demand draft of Rs.70,000/- (Rs. Seventy Thousand Only) in favour of respondent no. 4 and the same shall be handed over to the respondent no. 4 on the same day before the centre. d) That it has also been agreed between the parties that all the cases filed by them against each other shall be kept in abeyance for this intervening period. e) That this settlement had been read over and explained to the parties in Hindi in presence of their respective counsels, thereafter, they have signed the settlement. Put up this case again on 19.12.2024."

3. By this agreement we gather that the accused petitioner Arvind Kumar Maurya had returned Rs.1,10,000 to the first informant. In the case of Deena Nath, the court on 12.12.2024 in Crl. Misc. Writ Petition No. 19800 of 2024 passed the following order: "1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri G.P. Singh, learned A.G.A. for State respondents.

2. Present writ petition has been preferred to quash the FIR dated 30.08.2024 being Case Crime No.0452 of 2024, under Sections 420, 406, 467, 468, 471, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Bahjoi, District-Sambhal in respect of the petitioner and for a direction to respondents not to arrest the petitioner pursuant to impugned FIR.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently contended that the petitioner is having no complicity in the instant case as at no point of time he has accorded any appointment letter to anyone. Learned counsel for the petitioner has also placed reliance upon the order dated 21.10.2024 passed by this Court in the case of co-accused Arvind Kumar Maurya in Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No.17438 of 2024 wherein on the request of the parties, the matter was referred to the Mediation and Reconciliation of this Court. As it is pressed, the matter is seized before this Court, the fate of the said proceedings would definitely have serious ramification in the instant matter. The learned counsel for the petitioner states that the instant matter also be connected along with the said matter. Lastly, he contends that the petitioner does not have any criminal antecedents.

4. The matter requires consideration.

5. The respondents are accorded four weeks time to file counter affidavit. One week, thereafter, is accorded to file rejoinder affidavit.

6. List thereafter.

7. Till the next date of listing, or till submission of the police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. (now Section 193(3) of Bhartiya Nagrika Suraksha Sanhita, 2023), whichever is earlier, the respondents are restrained to arrest the petitioner pursuant to the impugned F.I.R. subject to cooperation in the ongoing investigation.

8. Connect with Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No.17438 of 2024 "

4. Today, when the matter was being argued, it transpired that the first informant in writ petition No. 17438 of 2024, because of the settlement agreement before the Mediation Centre, had received the sum of Rs. 110,000. However, it is not clear as to what exactly happened to the case in which the first informant of Writ Petition No. 17438 of 2024 was an accused, and in that case the accusation against him was also with regard to his taking certain amounts for getting a job for the first informant in the first information report dated 17.06.2024.

5. Learned AGA appearing for the State submitted that, definitely from the perusal of the first information report, a case was made out against the accused persons; they had taken an amount for the illegal purpose of getting jobs for certain people. He submits that this matter definitely requires investigation.

6. Under such circumstances, relying upon the judgement of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of State of Telangana Vs. Habib Abdullah Jellani, (2017) 2 SCC 779 and Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. vs. State of Maharashtra and Others, (2021) SCC Online SC 315 we are of the view that no interference is warranted in both the writ petitions. The investigation in the cases is essential. By means of the compromise the first informant in the Writ Petition No. 17438 of 2024 undoubtedly had received his money back but we are of the view that since the crime is such that involves the society in general, the first informant in Writ Petition No. 17438 of 2024 may not wish the prosecute the petitioners but the state in the interest of justice should bring the investigation to its logical end.

7. Since we find that in the aforesaid two petitions, the petitioners had been granted the relief of not getting arrested, the respondents are restrained from arresting the petitioners pursuant to the impugned F.I.R., subject to their cooperation in the ongoing investigation and till the submission of the Police report.

8. The writ petitions are accordingly disposed of. Order Date :- 16.4.2025 VIJAY KRISHNA JAISWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

2024. The allegations in the FIR were that the accused had promised that they would get the informant and persons known to him employment on the payment of certain amounts. It was a further allegation in that FIR that the first informant had paid to the accused certain amounts. It was stated that Ravindra Kumar and Manveer were paid Rs.1,50,000/- each. It was also stated in the FIR that the accused had stated that upon getting the joining letter, the first informant had to pay a further sum of Rs.3,90,000. When the first informant had incessantly waited for the joining letter and when the same was not forthcoming, the FIR which gave rise to case crime No. 0320 of 2024 was lodged on 17.06.2024 by the first informant, Deena Nath Sharma. Thereafter, there was again an FIR lodged on 30.08.2024 by Ravindra Kumar, who was an accused in the earlier first information report, wherein the accused persons were Arvind Kumar Maurya, and Deena Nath Sharma. In this FIR again the allegation was that Arvind Kumar Maurya and Deena Nath had taken certain amounts for getting jobs for Ravindra Kumar and for his acquaintances.

2. Arvind Kumar filed a writ petition, being Writ Petition No. 17438 of 2024, and Deena Nath filed another writ petition, being Writ Petition No. 19800 of 2024. When the Writ Petition No. 17438 of 2024 was filed, this Court passed the following order on

21.10.2024: "1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State respondents and Sri Aushim Luthra, learned counsel for respondent no.4.

2. The petitioner, by means of this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, has invoked the inherent jurisdiction of this Court with prayer to quash the impugned First Information Report dated 30.08.2024 registered as Case Crime No.0452 of 2024 under Section 420, 406, 467, 468, 471, 504, 506 IPC, P.S. Bahjoi, District Sambhal (Bheem Nagar).

3. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that the present matter relates to dispute between the parties qua transaction of money, which may be amicably settled by way of mediation and conciliation. Learned counsel for the petitioners states that there is every possibility of mediation in the present case, therefore, the matter may be referred to the Mediation and Conciliation Centre of this Court.

4. In view of the above, it is directed that petitioner shall deposit a sum of Rs.50,000/- within a week from today with the Mediation Centre of this Court, out of which Rs.5,000/- shall be paid to respondent no.4, on the date fixed, for his appearance before the Mediation Centre and Rs.5000/- shall be retained by the Mediation Centre as mediation fee and the rest amount of Rs.40,000/- shall remain with the Mediation Centre and shall only be released after final settlement of the matter.

5. The matter is remitted to the Mediation Centre with the direction that after deposit of aforesaid amount, by the petitioner, it shall issue notice to the parties fixing some date for mediation and shall make all possible efforts to conclude the mediation and conciliation proceedings expeditiously, preferably within a period of three months.

6. List after expiry of aforesaid period before the appropriate Bench along with the report of Mediation Centre.

7. Till the next date of listing, no coercive action shall be taken against the petitioner in the above mentioned case.

8. It is made clear that in case there occurs default by the petitioner either in depositing the amount or in appearing before the Mediation Centre on the date fixed, the interim order shall cease to operate and the Mediation Centre shall immediately communicate with the office which in turn shall list the case within a week before the appropriate Bench for passing orders in the matter. "

2. Before the Mediation Centre on 05.12.2024 the mediators drew a certain settlement agreement which is being reproduced here asunder:- "1) Disputes and differences had arisen between the Parties hereto and Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 17438 of 2024 were filed before the Hon'ble High Court. 2) The matter was referred to mediation / conciliation vide order dated 21.10.2024 passed by bench of Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J. and Hon'ble Prashant Kumar, J. 3) The parties agreed that Ms. Subhash Rathi and Mr. Shashi Bhushan, Advocates would act as their Conciliators/Mediators, in the Mediation Case No. 4113/2024. 4) Several joint and separate meetings were held during the process of Conciliation/Mediation on 28.11.2024 and 05.12.2024, the parties have with the assistance of the Mediators/Conciliators voluntarily arrived at an amicable solution resolving the above mentioned disputes and differences. 5) The dispute between the parties is regarding payment of Rs. 1,85,000/- (Rs. One Lakh Eighty Five Thousand) due against the petitioner- Arvind Kumar Maurya. Out of Rs.1,85,000, (Rs. One Lakh Eighty Five Thousand only) due against the petitioner, an amount of Rs. 40,000/- (Rs. Forty Thousand only) has already been paid by the petitioner to the respondent no. 4, the respondent no. 4 acknowledges the receipt of the same. However, the remaining payment i.e., Rs. 1,45,000/- (Rs. One Lakh Forty Five Thousand only) still remained unpaid. This gave rise to above mentioned Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 17438 of 2024. 6) The parties hereto confirm and declare that they have voluntarily and of their own free will arrived at this Settlement Agreement in the presence of the Mediators/Conciliators. 7) The following settlement has been arrived at between the Parties hereto:- a) That now, both the parties have settled their dispute on the condition that the petitioner Arvind Kumar Maurya shall pay an amount of Rs.1,10,000/- (Rs. One Lakh Ten Thousand only) to the respondent no. 4 Ravindra Kumar by way of demand draft. b) That today i.e., 05.12.2024, the petitioner Arvind Kumar Maurya has handed over a demand draft no. 486273 dated 04.12.2024 for Rs. 40,000/- (Rs. Forty Thousand only) drawn on State Bank of India in favour of Ravindra Kumar (respondent no. 4) and he has acknowledged the receipt of the same. c) That it has been agreed between the parties that on the next date fixed i.e. 19.12.2024, the petitioner- Arvind Kumar Maurya shall bring a demand draft of Rs.70,000/- (Rs. Seventy Thousand Only) in favour of respondent no. 4 and the same shall be handed over to the respondent no. 4 on the same day before the centre. d) That it has also been agreed between the parties that all the cases filed by them against each other shall be kept in abeyance for this intervening period. e) That this settlement had been read over and explained to the parties in Hindi in presence of their respective counsels, thereafter, they have signed the settlement. Put up this case again on 19.12.2024."

3. By this agreement we gather that the accused petitioner Arvind Kumar Maurya had returned Rs.1,10,000 to the first informant. In the case of Deena Nath, the court on 12.12.2024 in Crl. Misc. Writ Petition No. 19800 of 2024 passed the following order: "1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri G.P. Singh, learned A.G.A. for State respondents.

2. Present writ petition has been preferred to quash the FIR dated 30.08.2024 being Case Crime No.0452 of 2024, under Sections 420, 406, 467, 468, 471, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Bahjoi, District-Sambhal in respect of the petitioner and for a direction to respondents not to arrest the petitioner pursuant to impugned FIR.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently contended that the petitioner is having no complicity in the instant case as at no point of time he has accorded any appointment letter to anyone. Learned counsel for the petitioner has also placed reliance upon the order dated 21.10.2024 passed by this Court in the case of co-accused Arvind Kumar Maurya in Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No.17438 of 2024 wherein on the request of the parties, the matter was referred to the Mediation and Reconciliation of this Court. As it is pressed, the matter is seized before this Court, the fate of the said proceedings would definitely have serious ramification in the instant matter. The learned counsel for the petitioner states that the instant matter also be connected along with the said matter. Lastly, he contends that the petitioner does not have any criminal antecedents.

4. The matter requires consideration.

5. The respondents are accorded four weeks time to file counter affidavit. One week, thereafter, is accorded to file rejoinder affidavit.

6. List thereafter.

7. Till the next date of listing, or till submission of the police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. (now Section 193(3) of Bhartiya Nagrika Suraksha Sanhita, 2023), whichever is earlier, the respondents are restrained to arrest the petitioner pursuant to the impugned F.I.R. subject to cooperation in the ongoing investigation.

8. Connect with Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No.17438 of 2024 "

4. Today, when the matter was being argued, it transpired that the first informant in writ petition No. 17438 of 2024, because of the settlement agreement before the Mediation Centre, had received the sum of Rs. 110,000. However, it is not clear as to what exactly happened to the case in which the first informant of Writ Petition No. 17438 of 2024 was an accused, and in that case the accusation against him was also with regard to his taking certain amounts for getting a job for the first informant in the first information report dated 17.06.2024.

5. Learned AGA appearing for the State submitted that, definitely from the perusal of the first information report, a case was made out against the accused persons; they had taken an amount for the illegal purpose of getting jobs for certain people. He submits that this matter definitely requires investigation.

6. Under such circumstances, relying upon the judgement of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of State of Telangana Vs. Habib Abdullah Jellani, (2017) 2 SCC 779 and Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. vs. State of Maharashtra and Others, (2021) SCC Online SC 315 we are of the view that no interference is warranted in both the writ petitions. The investigation in the cases is essential. By means of the compromise the first informant in the Writ Petition No. 17438 of 2024 undoubtedly had received his money back but we are of the view that since the crime is such that involves the society in general, the first informant in Writ Petition No. 17438 of 2024 may not wish the prosecute the petitioners but the state in the interest of justice should bring the investigation to its logical end.

7. Since we find that in the aforesaid two petitions, the petitioners had been granted the relief of not getting arrested, the respondents are restrained from arresting the petitioners pursuant to the impugned F.I.R., subject to their cooperation in the ongoing investigation and till the submission of the Police report.

8. The writ petitions are accordingly disposed of. Order Date :- 16.4.2025 VIJAY KRISHNA JAISWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad