← Library
High Court of DelhiCRL.M.C./4019/2024

Naveen Kumar Jindal v. State Of NCT Of Delhi & ANR.

2024-09-04Hon'Ble Mr. Justice Manoj Kumar Ohri3 pages

$~5 and 6 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.M.C. 4019/2024 and CRL.M.A. 15301/2024 NAVEEN KUMAR JINDAL .....Petitioner Through: Mr.Shaurya R.Rai, Advocate versus STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR.

.....Respondents Through: Mr. Nawal Kishore Jha, APP for State with SI Deepak Panwar Mr.Sandeep Kapur and Mr.Saurav Mishra, Advocates for respondent No.2 + CRL.M.C. 4085/2024 and CRL.M.A. 15522/2024 NAVEEN KUMAR JINDAL .....Petitioner Through: Mr.Shaurya R.Rai, Advocate versus STATE OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR.

.....Respondents Through: Mr. Laksh Khanna, APP for State with SI Deepak Panwar Mr.Sandeep Kapur and Mr.Saurav Mishra, Advocates for respondent No.2

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR OHRI

O R D E R

% 04.09.2024 1.

By way of present petitions, the petitioner seeks cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to respondent No.2/Deepak Kapoor in CRL.M.C. 4019/2024 and respondent No.2/Vartik Kapoor in CRL.M.C. 4085/2024 The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

arising out of FIR No.96/2023, registered under Sections 406/420/465/467/468/471/120B/34 IPC at P.S. Barakhamba Road, Delhi vide order dated 15.03.2024, on the ground that the respondents' have failed to abide by the terms of the Settlement Deed dated 11.12.2023. 2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has referred to paragraph 3 of the aforesaid Settlement Deed, wherein a total of 9 tranches of payments are mentioned. He submits that though 8 instalments have been released, the 9th instalment is withheld by the respondents.

3.

Learned counsel for the private respondents submits that the parties have entered into the aforesaid settlement, which provided that the parties would file a petition seeking quashing of the FIR. Since no steps have been taken by the petitioner for the same, the 9th instalment has not been released. He, on instructions, further submits that the said settlement was arrived at between the parties for quashing of the FIR against all the accused persons. The said submission is, however, disputed by the learned counsel for the petitioner, who submits that the settlement was only between the parties thereto.

4.

At this stage, learned counsel for the private respondents submits that respondent No.2 does not wish to withhold the 9th instalment and the same would be deposited with the Registrar General of this Court within two days from today.

5.

Considering that there is some dispute between the parties on the aspect of whether the settlement is arrived at between the petitioners and all the accused persons or only between the parties herein, let the amount of the 9th instalment be deposited with the Registrar General of this Court within two days from today, subject to the final outcome of the proceedings The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

pending between the parties. The amount so deposited shall be kept in the form of an FDR on auto renewal mode.

6.

In view of the above, no ground is made for interference with the impugned order. The present petitions are disposed of alongwith the pending applications.

MANOJ KUMAR OHRI, J SEPTEMBER 4, 2024 na The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.