9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (8) TMI 1294X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... strate on 21.07.2015 in the context of two different complaint cases (CC Nos. 50/10/12 and 51/10/12) which were instituted by the petitioner (hereinafter the complainant) against the private party respondents herein, each alleging offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. By the impugned orders, the application of the private party respondents (the accused) for refund of the amount of Rs. 38 lakhs that had been earlier paid by them to the complainant were granted and the Metropolitan Magistrate called upon the petitioner (the complainant) to submit the same in the form of fixed deposit receipt. 2. Though the private party respondents (the accused persons) were duly served and had even appeared through counsel, seek ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt would cooperate and the accused persons would move Allahabad High Court with the prayer for quashing of the FIR that had been registered in Noida (U.P.). It was further agreed that the balance amount of Rs. 24.50 lakhs would be paid "the moment", the quashing of the FIR "was done by the competent court of jurisdiction". 4. In the wake of the above-mentioned settlement agreement dated 22.01.2014, certain submissions were made before the court of Metropolitan Magistrate that were recorded in the proceedings, similar in both the complaint cases on 22.02.2014. The criminal complaints were not withdrawn. Rather, the matter was deferred for recording of statement for withdrawal of the cases for 29.05.2014. It appears, no steps were taken imme ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he aforesaid petition for quashing is still pending before the High Court of Allahabad, it having been once dismissed in default though later restored, the petitioner (the complainant) continuing to be willing to cooperate with such process. But, the fact remains that the balance amount payable in terms of the settlement agreement has also not reached the hands of the petitioner till date. 7. Against the above backdrop, the accused persons (the private party respondents) moved the application seeking restoration of the position as it existed prior to entering into the settlement, which, in simple terms, would mean direction to the complainant to refund the amount of Rs. 38 lakhs which has been received by it under the said settlement agree ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
