Praveen Jain & ANR v. The State & ANR

$~43 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ CRL.M.C. 167/2019 PRAVEEN JAIN & ANR ..... Petitioners Through:

Mr. Udit Mishra and Mr. Sanjay Diwakar, Advs.

versus THE STATE & ANR ..... Respondents Through:

Mr. Mukesh Kumar, APP for State with SI Lokendra Singh, P.S. Okhla Industrial Area.

Mr. Mandeep Singh, Adv. for R-2 with R-3-Managing Director of Respondent no.2 in person.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. PATHAK

O R D E R

% 15.01.2019 It is submitted that petitioners were employees of respondent no.2 of which respondent no. 3 is managing director. The allegations against the petitioners are that while in employment petitioners started their own similar business and used the datas, information, website, goodwill etc. of respondent no.2-company. The disputes between the petitioners and respondent no.2 had led to registration of FIR No. 176/2017 under Sections 420/120B/408 IPC, Sections 66/43 of the Information Technology Act and

Sections 29/30 of the Trade Mark Act at police station Okhla Industrial Area.

It is further submitted that during the pendency of present FIR petitioner no.2 settled the matter with respondent no.2 before the Mediation Centre, Saket Court on 01.07.2017; whereas petitioner no.1 settled the matter with respondent no.2 before the Mediation Centre, Saket Court on 22.08.2017, therefore, aforesaid FIR and the consequent proceedings emanating therefrom may be quashed.

Respondent no.3, who is managing director of respondent no.2, is present in Court and has been identified by SI Lokendra Singh of police station Okhla Industrial Area.

He submits that matter has indeed been settled between the petitioners and respondent no.2 amicably. He further submits that respondent no.2 has no objection in case the aforesaid FIR is quashed in view of the settlement.

Keeping in mind the settlement arrived at between the petitioners and respondent no.2 voluntarily, in my view, no fruitful purpose would be served in keeping the criminal proceedings pending. Accordingly, in the interest of justice, aforesaid FIR and the consequent proceedings emanating therefrom are quashed.

Petition is disposed of in the above terms. Miscellaneous application is disposed of as infructuous.

Dasti.

A.K. PATHAK, J.

JANUARY 15, 2019 ga