Aditya Bansal And Another vs State Of Punjab And Others

Jagmohan Bansal, J

The petitioners through instant petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India are seeking direction to official respondents not to harass them by holding repeated and multiple inquiries on the complaints submitted by respondent No.7.

As per petitioners, they invested money in the project of respondent Nos. 5 & 6. A dispute erupted between petitioners and respondent Nos. 5 & 6. The private respondent submitted complaint against petitioner before police authorities. The matter was inquired and FIR No.0145 dated 30.08.2023 under Sections 406 & 420 IPC was registered against respondents No.5 and 6. The respondent Nos. 5 & 6 instituted civil suit against petitioners seeking permanent injunction. The respondent Nos. 5 & 6 retired from aforesaid firm and respondent No. 7 submitted complaint dated 12.12.2022 against the petitioners. They joined inquiry and tendered their statements. The police authorities found them innocent and complaint was consigned to record room. The respondent No.7 again filed a complaint. The respondent Nos. 3 & 4 pressurized them to settle the matter with respondent No. 7 as per his terms and conditions. The respondent No. 5 approached this Court seeking quashing of aforesaid FIR. This Court has stayed the proceedings pending before the trial Court.

Learned State counsel on instructions from Mr. Jaswinder Singh, ASI submits that second complaint filed against petitioners has been consigned to record room, thus, petition has rendered infructuous.

Learned counsel for the petitioners does not dispute the aforesaid statement.

In the wake of statement of both sides, the petition is dismissed as having been rendered infructuous.

Pending Misc. application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of