GOLD QUEST INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU
LAWS(SC)-2014-9-25
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA (FROM: MADRAS)
Decided on
September 08,2014
Gold Quest International Private Limited
Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF TAMIL NADU
Respondents
Referred Judgements :-
MADHU LIMAYE VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [REFERRED TO]STATE OF HARYANA VS. BHAJAN LAL [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF HARYANA VS. BHAJAN LAL [REFERRED TO]
SURENDRA NATH MOHANTY VS. STATE OF ORISSA [REFERRED TO]
B S JOSHI VS. STATE OF HARYANA [REFERRED TO]
NIKHIL MERCHANT VS. CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION [REFERRED TO]
GIAN SINGH VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [REFERRED TO]
Cited Judgements :-
VIKRAMJIT SINGH VS. STATE OF HARYANA [LAWS(P&H)-2022-7-138] [REFERRED TO]RAVINDER SINGH VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [LAWS(P&H)-2022-1-57] [REFERRED TO]
SURENDER KUMAR VS. STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS [LAWS(P&H)-2015-7-833] [REFERRED]
VIPAN SHARMA AND ANOTHER VS. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER [LAWS(P&H)-2015-7-510] [REFERRED]
AMRIT DAS VS. STATE OF ORISSA [LAWS(ORI)-2022-10-93] [REFERRED TO]
SATISH S/O SRI PUTTAIAH VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA [LAWS(KAR)-2018-10-300] [REFERRED TO]
SURESH THIMIRI AND ORS. VS. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [LAWS(BOM)-2016-5-28] [REFERRED TO]
NITISH GHAI VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [LAWS(P&H)-2022-3-37] [REFERRED TO]
HARNARESH PAL VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [LAWS(P&H)-2022-3-96] [REFERRED TO]
RANJODH SINGH VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [LAWS(P&H)-2022-3-103] [REFERRED TO]
JAGJIT SINGH VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [LAWS(P&H)-2022-7-77] [REFERRED TO]
BALJOT SINGH VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [LAWS(P&H)-2022-7-134] [REFERRED TO]
RAJAT VS. STATE OF HARYANA AND ANR [LAWS(P&H)-2015-8-495] [REFERRED]
SATBIR VS. STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER [LAWS(P&H)-2015-8-604] [REFERRED]
SUDHIR MEHNDIRATTA AND OTHERS VS. STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER [LAWS(P&H)-2015-8-776] [REFERRED]
JASWANT SINGH AND ORS VS. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER [LAWS(P&H)-2015-7-687] [REFERRED]
SUKHWINDER KAUR AND OTHERS VS. STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS [LAWS(P&H)-2015-10-492] [REFERRED]
SANNI VS. STATE OF U.P. [LAWS(ALL)-2023-1-47] [REFERRED TO]
MOHIT GOYAL VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [LAWS(P&H)-2020-3-41] [REFERRED TO]
NEERAJ JOSHI VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [LAWS(P&H)-2020-2-360] [REFERRED TO]
SAGAR KUNDAL VS. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS. [LAWS(P&H)-2015-5-239] [REFERRED TO]
PRITAM SINGH VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [LAWS(P&H)-2015-5-378] [REFERRED TO]
JATINDER SINGH VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [LAWS(P&H)-2015-5-639] [REFERRED TO]
KARAMPAL SINGH VS. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANR [LAWS(P&H)-2015-7-889] [REFERRED]
JAGROOP SINGH AND ORS VS. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANR [LAWS(P&H)-2015-7-736] [REFERRED]
MANGE RAM AND ANOTHER VS. STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER [LAWS(P&H)-2015-7-672] [REFERRED]
A2Z POWERCOM PVT LTD AND OTHERS VS. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER [LAWS(P&H)-2015-8-731] [REFERRED]
ANKUR UPPAL VS. STATE OF HARYANA [LAWS(P&H)-2022-3-97] [REFERRED TO]
GURPREET KAUR VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [LAWS(P&H)-2022-3-31] [REFERRED TO]
JAGJIT SINGH VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [LAWS(P&H)-2022-3-54] [REFERRED TO]
LASHKAR RAM VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [LAWS(P&H)-2022-7-2] [REFERRED TO]
GURSEWAK SINGH VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [LAWS(P&H)-2020-3-94] [REFERRED TO]
AMAR SINGH AND OTHERS VS. STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS [LAWS(P&H)-2020-3-28] [REFERRED TO]
PUSHPENDRA SINGH VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ANR. [LAWS(RAJ)-2016-6-139] [REFERRED TO]
P. RAMPRAKASH NARAYAN VS. STATE OF ORISSA [LAWS(ORI)-2020-1-15] [REFERRED TO]
SUKHWINDER KAUR VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [LAWS(P&H)-2022-7-81] [REFERRED TO]
AJAY BANSAL VS. STATE OF HARYANA [LAWS(P&H)-2022-7-114] [REFERRED TO]
KRISHAN LAL DHINGRA VS. STATE OF HARYANA [LAWS(P&H)-2022-7-128] [REFERRED TO]
BALJEET SINGH VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [LAWS(P&H)-2022-3-35] [REFERRED TO]
SANJEEV VERMA VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [LAWS(P&H)-2022-3-94] [REFERRED TO]
DIWAN CHAND VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [LAWS(P&H)-2022-3-107] [REFERRED TO]
BALWINDER SINGH VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [LAWS(P&H)-2022-3-109] [REFERRED TO]
AMIT KUMAR SHARMA VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [LAWS(P&H)-2022-3-137] [REFERRED TO]
PIARA SINGH AND ORS. VS. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS. [LAWS(P&H)-2015-10-101] [REFERRED TO]
NAVDEEP SINGH ATWAL VS. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER [LAWS(P&H)-2015-8-496] [REFERRED]
KAMALDEEP SHARMA AND ANR VS. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANR [LAWS(P&H)-2015-8-498] [REFERRED]
SAURABH MADAN AND ANOTHER VS. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER [LAWS(P&H)-2015-7-501] [REFERRED]
SATISH CHANDRA GUPTA VS. STATE OF HARYANA AND ANR [LAWS(P&H)-2015-7-619] [REFERRED]
HARISH GULLA VS. STATE OF U.P. [LAWS(ALL)-2024-2-33] [REFERRED TO]
AVINASH SINGH & ORS. VS. STATE OF U.P. & ANR. [LAWS(ALL)-2020-6-144] [REFERRED TO]
DHARABEN PRASHANTBHAI PARMAR VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [LAWS(GJH)-2017-3-588] [REFERRED TO]
PHIYOLA MYRTHONG VS. STATE OF MEGHALAYA [LAWS(MEGH)-2022-5-39] [REFERRED TO]
TEJVEER SINGH DHADLI. VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [LAWS(P&H)-2019-5-382] [REFERRED TO]
ASHWANI KUMAR VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [LAWS(P&H)-2021-5-51] [REFERRED TO]
UJJAGAR SINGH VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [LAWS(P&H)-2022-1-62] [REFERRED TO]
YOGESH KUMAR VS. STATE OF HARYANA [LAWS(P&H)-2022-3-95] [REFERRED TO]
AJAY KUMAR AND ORS. VS. STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS. [LAWS(P&H)-2015-5-99] [REFERRED TO]
HARPREET SINGH AND ORS. VS. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS. [LAWS(P&H)-2015-5-117] [REFERRED TO]
V S MADAN VS. M/S RAVINDRA TUBES LTD [LAWS(P&H)-2015-8-684] [REFERRED]
MEHAR CHAND VS. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER [LAWS(P&H)-2015-10-476] [REFERRED]
RAGHBIR CHAND AND OTHERS VS. PARVEEN RANI SHARMA [LAWS(P&H)-2015-10-466] [REFERRED]
RAMANDEEP KAUR AND ORS. VS. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS. [LAWS(P&H)-2015-7-103] [REFERRED TO]
TARSEM LAL AND ORS. VS. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS. [LAWS(P&H)-2015-7-310] [REFERRED TO]
NITIN SINGLA VS. STATE OF HARYANA [LAWS(P&H)-2022-3-98] [REFERRED TO]
TADIKAMALLA NAGENDRA RAO VS. STATE OF HARYANA [LAWS(P&H)-2022-3-111] [REFERRED TO]
NCHUNGO HUMTSOE VS. STATE OF NAGALAND [LAWS(GAU)-2019-11-196] [REFERRED TO]
GAGAN AERO SPACE LTD VS. STATE OF TELANGANA [LAWS(TLNG)-2019-4-129] [REFERRED TO]
GURJIT SINGH AND OTHERS VS. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER [LAWS(P&H)-2015-10-472] [REFERRED]
SANGAM @ RAHUL VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [LAWS(P&H)-2015-5-380] [REFERRED TO]
LALIT MIGLANI @ DHEERAJ AND OTHERS VS. STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER [LAWS(P&H)-2015-7-591] [REFERRED]
HARJIT KAUR AND ANOTHER VS. STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER [LAWS(P&H)-2015-7-675] [REFERRED]
KASHMIR SINGH AND OTHERS VS. STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS [LAWS(P&H)-2015-8-460] [REFERRED]
DHARAMBIR SINGH @ DHEERA AND ANOTHER VS. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER [LAWS(P&H)-2015-8-463] [REFERRED]
SARABJIT SINGH AND OTHERS VS. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER [LAWS(P&H)-2015-8-698] [REFERRED]
HARMESH SINGH VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [LAWS(P&H)-2022-3-86] [REFERRED TO]
SATYA PARKASH VS. STATE OF HARYANA [LAWS(P&H)-2022-7-135] [REFERRED TO]
MANOJ KUMAR ANAND VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [LAWS(P&H)-2020-3-40] [REFERRED TO]
RANJAN KUMAR SAHOO VS. STATE OF ODISHA [LAWS(ORI)-2021-12-10] [REFERRED TO]
GURDEEP SINGH VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [LAWS(P&H)-2022-3-34] [REFERRED TO]
AMIT PASSI VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [LAWS(P&H)-2022-3-108] [REFERRED TO]
SALONI ARORA VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [LAWS(P&H)-2022-3-65] [REFERRED TO]
GURINDER SINGH MAND VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [LAWS(P&H)-2022-7-80] [REFERRED TO]
SEWA SINGH VS. STATE OF U.T. CHANDIGARH [LAWS(P&H)-2022-7-115] [REFERRED TO]
KIRANPAL VS. STATE OF HARYANA [LAWS(P&H)-2022-1-64] [REFERRED TO]
JAGIR SINGH VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [LAWS(P&H)-2022-2-1] [REFERRED TO]
ANGREJ ALI VS. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS. [LAWS(P&H)-2015-10-20] [REFERRED TO]
RAJINDER GARG AND ORS. VS. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS. [LAWS(P&H)-2015-10-95] [REFERRED TO]
SANDEEP SINGH CHAHAL AND OTHERS VS. STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS [LAWS(P&H)-2015-8-644] [REFERRED]
SATGUR SINGH AND ANR VS. KULDIP SINGH AND ANR [LAWS(P&H)-2015-8-674] [REFERRED]
JASPAL SINGH VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [LAWS(P&H)-2015-5-640] [REFERRED TO]
ANKIT KAPOOR VS. STATE OF HARYANA [LAWS(P&H)-2020-3-60] [REFERRED TO]
KULVIR SINGH. VS. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER [LAWS(P&H)-2019-12-202] [REFERRED TO]
HARBHAGWAN VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [LAWS(P&H)-2020-3-65] [REFERRED TO]
HEMANT PASRICHA AND OTHERS VS. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER [LAWS(P&H)-2020-3-37] [REFERRED TO]
AMANVEER KAUR VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [LAWS(P&H)-2022-3-39] [REFERRED TO]
HARINDER SINGH VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [LAWS(P&H)-2022-7-78] [REFERRED TO]
ATUL CHADHA VS. STATE OF HARYANA [LAWS(P&H)-2022-7-140] [REFERRED TO]
VIMAL MAHAJAN VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [LAWS(P&H)-2022-9-94] [REFERRED TO]
GURDEEP SINGH VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [LAWS(P&H)-2015-5-362] [REFERRED TO]
NACHATTAR SINGH AND OTHERS VS. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER [LAWS(P&H)-2015-7-727] [REFERRED]
BHUPINDER KAUR AND OTHERS VS. STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS [LAWS(P&H)-2015-10-418] [REFERRED]
NATRAJAN SUNDARESAN VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER [LAWS(BOM)-2017-4-104] [REFERRED TO]
MEHUL CHINUBHAI CHOKSI VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [LAWS(GJH)-2023-10-6] [REFERRED TO]
JUDGEMENT
-
(1.)Leave granted.
(2.)The question before us in this appeal is whether the Division Bench of High Court has erred in law in setting aside the order of learned Single Judge quashing the First Information Report (for short, 'FIR') on the basis of the compromise and settlement between the complainant and the appellant.
(3.)Brief facts of the case are that the appellant is an International Numismatic Company which has operations in over sixty countries. It is pleaded that it conducts its business with necessary licence. The multi level marketing through direct selling of products is being adopted by the Company in the interest of the consumers by eliminating the middleman and rewarding the consumer by reducing the prices. The appellant-company has over sixteen thousand members/ consumers in and around the city of Chennai alone. A complaint was made in the year 2003 by Respondent No.7 against the appellant-company alleging non-compliance of issuance of numismatic gold coin on receipt of Rs.16,800/- from wife of Respondent No.7 as per the promise made by the appellant-company. Some other customers also had complaints on the basis of which Respondent No.4 registered a case under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code read with Sections 4, 5 & 6 of the Prize Chits and Money Circulation (Banning) Act, 1978. The appellant- company filed a writ petition being W.P.No.26784 of 2003 before the High Court of Judicature at Madras praying therein that the FIR registered against it be quashed. Since all the claimants including the complainant settled the dispute with the appellant-company and entered into an agreement, learned Single Judge of the High Court by its order dated 19th April, 2005 quashed the FIR, and disposed of the aforesaid writ petition. However, the State-respondents challenged the said order dated 19th April, 2005 passed by the learned Single Judge whereby the FIR No.307 of 2003 was quashed, before the Division Bench of the High Court. The Division Bench allowed the writ appeal being W.A.No.1178 of 2005 filed by the State- respondents and directed Respondent No.4 to investigate the crime. Hence, this appeal.
(2.)The question before us in this appeal is whether the Division Bench of High Court has erred in law in setting aside the order of learned Single Judge quashing the First Information Report (for short, 'FIR') on the basis of the compromise and settlement between the complainant and the appellant.
(3.)Brief facts of the case are that the appellant is an International Numismatic Company which has operations in over sixty countries. It is pleaded that it conducts its business with necessary licence. The multi level marketing through direct selling of products is being adopted by the Company in the interest of the consumers by eliminating the middleman and rewarding the consumer by reducing the prices. The appellant-company has over sixteen thousand members/ consumers in and around the city of Chennai alone. A complaint was made in the year 2003 by Respondent No.7 against the appellant-company alleging non-compliance of issuance of numismatic gold coin on receipt of Rs.16,800/- from wife of Respondent No.7 as per the promise made by the appellant-company. Some other customers also had complaints on the basis of which Respondent No.4 registered a case under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code read with Sections 4, 5 & 6 of the Prize Chits and Money Circulation (Banning) Act, 1978. The appellant- company filed a writ petition being W.P.No.26784 of 2003 before the High Court of Judicature at Madras praying therein that the FIR registered against it be quashed. Since all the claimants including the complainant settled the dispute with the appellant-company and entered into an agreement, learned Single Judge of the High Court by its order dated 19th April, 2005 quashed the FIR, and disposed of the aforesaid writ petition. However, the State-respondents challenged the said order dated 19th April, 2005 passed by the learned Single Judge whereby the FIR No.307 of 2003 was quashed, before the Division Bench of the High Court. The Division Bench allowed the writ appeal being W.A.No.1178 of 2005 filed by the State- respondents and directed Respondent No.4 to investigate the crime. Hence, this appeal.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.