The Allahabad High Court has quashed the criminal proceeding pending in Banda court against former MP Bal Kumar Patel.
A Single Bench of Justice Sanjay Kumar Singh passed this order while hearing an application under section 482 filed by Bal Kumar Patel Alias Raj Kumar.
The application under Section 482 Cr.P.C has been filed by the applicant with a prayer to quash the order dated 24.04.2024 passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, MP/MLA Court, Banda as well as further proceeding of Case under Sections 406, 419, 420 I.P.C, Police Station Kotwali Nagar, District Banda, pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, MP/MLA Court, Banda on the basis of compromise between the parties concerned.
The facts of the case are that the complainant/informant Rama Kant Tripathi lodged a First Information Report on 11.10.2020 against the applicant Bal Kumar Patel @ Raj Kumar and co-accused Bhanu Pratap Chaturvedi for the alleged offence under Sections 406, 419 and 420 I.P.C at Police Station Kotwali Nagar, District Banda alleging inter-alia that he is a contractor and co-accused Bhanu Pratap Chaturvedi is his relative, who is Lekhpal in Banda. In March 2017, Bhanu Pratap Chaturvedi came to his house and told him that there is huge work of sand in which if he invests once then he would have no tension for future.
On 14th December, 2017 he told that on 17.12.2017 “Sahab” will be coming, who will make him a partner of ten percent. On 17.12.2017 he along with Bhanu Pratap Chaturvedi went to the Irrigation Inspection Bungalow, Banda where he was introduced with Sahab, and then he came to know that Sahab is former Member of Parliament, Bal Kumar Patel, after which Chaturvedi told him to give money. Then Bal Kumar Patel told him that he will be in Rae Bareilly and he may deposit Rs 5,00,000/- (rupees five lac) in his Account of Punjab National Bank.
Thereafter on 20.12.2017 he transferred Rs 5,00,000/- (rupees five lac) in the said account through RTGS but whenever he calls Bal Kumar Patel and ask him for getting the agreement done, he used to say for getting it done very soon.
One day Bhanu Pratap Chaturvedi called him and said that on 28.05.2018 Bal Kumar Patel is coming and will be meeting in the Inspection Bungalow as there is lot of sand and there will be a requirement of about 50-60 lac for which he is trying to make arrangement through his friends. Then contractor Rudra Prakash, contractor Satendra Shukla and his relative Yogesh Pandey agreed to invest money and on 28th May, they reached Inspection Bungalow where Bal Kumar Patel told them that a lease has been granted in favour of his son Sudhir and a required Rawana is to be filled. On believing the same, Rudra Prakash gave Rs 10,00,000/- (rupees ten lac), Satendra Shukla Rs 20,00,000/- (rupees twenty lac) and Yogesh Pandey Rs 9,00,000/- (rupees nine lac) to which Yogesh was told that he would be a partner of only nine percent, on which he said that he would send the money or get it transferred through RTGS. After that he transferred Rs 16,00,000/- (rupees sixteen lac) through RTGS in the account of Bal Kumar Patel.
Since Bal Kumar Patel used to delay the talks, then on 27.12.2018 he sought information through RTI as to whether any file has been approved for lease of sand in the name of Sudhir, Rama Shanker Patel and Dev Sharan Patel for Manpur Khurd Naraini to which he did not get any reply. Then, he himself went to the concerned department, and on inquiry, he came to know that no such file is approved. When he tried to contact Bal Kumar Patel on phone, he used to tell his location either at Delhi, Rae Bareilly or Pratapgarh.
Therefore he and his associates Rudra Prakash, Satendra Shukla and Yogesh Pandey have a belief that Bhanu Pratap Chaturvedi and Bal Kumar Patel both committed cheating and fraud with them. Thereafter they demanded their money back, but he has not returned Rs 65,000,00/- (rupees sixty five lac).
After culmination of investigation, charge-sheet was submitted against the applicant on 29.09.2021, on which the concerned court took cognizance on 02.11.2021.
The applicant had preferred a Criminal Misc Anticipatory Bail Application U/s 438 Cr.P.C and application under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
Both the applications were heard together and rejected vide common order dated 09.12.2022 by the co-ordinate Bench of the Court. The said order dated 09.12.2022 was challenged by the applicant before the Supreme Court by means of Special Leave to Appeal, in which by order dated 16.01.2023 the relief sought by the applicant for quashing the criminal proceeding was refused.
Thereafter, the applicant surrendered on 18.8.2023 before the Court of Civil Judge, Senior Division, Banda and his regular bail application has been rejected by Special Judge, MP/MLA, Banda vide order dated 23.8.2023.
“Having heard the arguments of the counsel for the parties, I find that after compromise/settlement arrived at between the parties in the case, the chance of ultimate conviction is bleak and therefore, no useful purpose is likely to be served by allowing a criminal prosecution against the accusedBal Kumar Patel alias Raj Kumar and Bhanu Pratap Chaturvedi to continue, as the same would be futile exercise and a sheer wastage of precious time of the Court. The continuation of a criminal proceedings after compromise would cause oppression and prejudice to the parties concerned. If the parties concerned wants to bury the hatchet and are willing to move on in personal dispute on the basis of compromise, they may be allowed to compound the offences in terms of settlement, because in such circumstances the proceedings can hardly be taken to their logical culmination and, the prospect of conviction gets lost.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case in the light of dictum and guidelines laid down by the Apex Court in cases of Nikhil Merchant vs Central Bureau of Investigation, 2008 (9) SCC 677, Manoj Sharma vs State and others, 2008 (16) SCC 1, Parbatbhai Aahir @ Parbatbhai Vs State of Gujarat, (2017) 9 SCC 641 and State of Madhya Pradesh Vs Laxmi Narayan and others, AIR 2019 SC 1296, the Court feels that this is a fit case, where this Court can exercise its inherent power to secure the end of justice. In the case in hand interest of justice would be met, if the prayer of parties is acceded to and the criminal proceedings and other litigation between the parties is brought to an end”, the Court observed while allowing the petition.
In view of the above, the Court quashed the order dated 24.04.2024 and proceeding of Case against the accused-applicant Bal Kumar Patel Alias Raj Kumar and Criminal Case against accused-Bhanu Pratap Chaturvedi.