Cletus Trevor Sequiera vs Rajalakshmi Shanbhag

A.N. Venugopal Gowda, J.—Petitioners were the employees of M/s. Narus Networks Private Limited, a company incorporated under the Companies Act. The company had employed the first respondent as Director - Software Delivery, to function from its Bangalore Office. The company kept the first respondent under suspension, with effect from 15.03.2011, pending enquiry against her, due to the disputes which arose between the company and respondent No. 1. Company initiated an in-house investigation against the first respondent with regard to certain dispute. A report having been received, the company decided to take action against the first respondent. That on 20/22.05.2011, the first respondent having pleaded that she be allowed to resign from services, instead of the company terminating her, she tendered resignation on 25.05.2011 from the services of the Company. Simultaneously, a cheque for Rs. 3,89,320/- and Experience Certificate dated 25.05.2011 and the provident fund details, etc., were delivered to her i.e., while accepting the offer of resignation. The company issued a letter dated 25.05.2011 of termination of employment and the first respondent accepted the same without any demur. Respondent No. 1, on 25.04.2011, having lodged a complaint with the Amruthahalli Police Station, alleging that she has been receiving calls from various telephone numbers threatening that her job and her life is in danger. On 26.05.2011, respondent No. 1 filed a second complaint against the petitioners and another employee of the company with the Ulsoor Police Station, which registered a case in Crime No. 177/2011, for the offences under Sections 420, 468, 471, 120B IPC. On 27.05.2011, a third complaint was filed against the petitioners with the Amruthahalli Police, registered as Crime No. 97/2011 for the offences under Sections 448, 504, 506 r/w Section 34 IPC. On 08.06.2011, a fourth complaint was registered against certain employees of the company before the Amruthahalli Police, and a case in Crime No. 101/2011 was registered for the offences punishable under Sections 504, 506 r/w Section 34 of IPC. Again on 11.06.2011, fifth complaint was registered before the Station House Officer, Law and Order, Ulsoor Police Station, making certain allegations against the petitioners. On 17.06.2011, another complaint was filed against an employee of the company before the Amruthahalli Police, which registered a case in Crime No. 111/2011 for the offences under Sections 448, 504, 506 r/w Section 34 of IPC. After investigation, the police submitted charge sheets, registered in C.C. Nos. 22447/2012, 27085/2011, 27086/2011 and 27087/2011, in the court of Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru. Crl.P. Nos. 276/2013, 6202/2011, 6233/2011 and 6234/2011, filed by the petitioners, to quash proceedings against them, in view of the agreement entered into between the parties on 03.03.2012, were allowed.

This petition was filed to quash C.C. No. 22820/2012, pending in the Court of X Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru, on the ground that it is of a civil nature and that the dispute has come to an end.

Heard the learned advocate for the petitioners and learned HCGP for respondent No. 2. Respondent No. 1 has remained absent.

Crl.P. No. 6233/2011, filed to quash C.C. No. 27086/2011, in the Court of Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru, was allowed on 12.03.2012, by noticing that the dispute relates to termination of service of the first respondent by the company and the first information alleged for the offences was filed with a view to achieve immediate result relating to service benefits of the informant. Crl.P. No. 6234/2011, filed to quash C.C. No. 27087/2011, in the Court of Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru, was allowed on 12.03.2012, on the same ground.

Having perused the proceedings of C.C. No. 22820/2012, pending in the Court of X Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru, in view of the agreement which the first respondent has entered into and the orders passed on 12.03.2012 in Crl.P. Nos. 6233/2011 and 6234/2011, the information furnished to the police alleging commission of offences being with a view to achieve immediate result, relating to service benefits of the informant and the matter having been settled amicably between the employer, its employees and the first respondent - informant, this is a fit case to exercise power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. and quash the proceedings in C.C. No. 22820/2012, on the file of the X Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru.

In the result, petition is allowed and the case registered in C.C. No. 22820/2012, on the file of the X Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru, is quashed.