IN THE HON’BLE COURT OF DISTRICT & SESSION JUDGE

PATIALA HOUSE COURT, NEW DELHI

APPLICATION NO. OF 2023

In the matter of:

Mr. Ramesh Bhojwani …Petitioner/Applicant

Vs
State of NCT of Delhi & Ors ….Respondent

AN APPLICATION FOR COMPROMISE WITH THE LEAVE OF HON,BLE

COURT

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:

1. The FIR No. 0014/2019 dated 19.01.2019 u/Section 66 Information

Technology Act, 2000 and 408 IPC registered with P.S.- Special Cell (SB) Delhi .
Complaint for fraudulently/ dishonestly using/sharing complainant
company business confidential data/ record/information and thereby
committing Data Theft, Fraud and Cheating, dishonestly
Misappropriation of data, criminal conspiracy, Criminal Breach of Trust
and other offences punishable under Indian Penal Code Information
Technology Act.
2. It is submitted that because of the aforesaid FIR, the Petitioner has not
been able to join or take up employment in any place connected with
the same industry and is jeopardizing the livelihood of the Petitioner.
The Petitioner’s wife has delivered a baby this year, The present
employer has also suspended the applicant for the false FIR that has
been lodged against him. Further the Applicant’s wife who was still
working with the complainant company has also been forced to resign
rendering the household of the applicant family without any source of
livelihood and Income therefore, the Petitioner prays for necessary
orders.
3. That on 22.04.2019, the Ld. Addl. Sessions Judge-02(FTC), Patiala House
Courts, New Delhi, was pleased to grant anticipatory bail to the
Petitioner. Copy of the Order dated 22.04.2019, passed by the Ld. Addl.
Sessions Judge-02(FTC), Patiala House Courts, New Delhi.

4. It is submitted that pursuant to the same, the Petitioner has never been
further called by the concerned IO for further investigation, and the
threat of the FIR continues to loom over the Petitioner and his family
and has become a permanent source of impediment to the Petitioner to
seek any source of employment.

5. It is also submitted that in the present FIR no offence is made out against
the petitioner because the Petitioner had never misused the emails or
correspondences professionally or personally. The Petitioner had in fact
informed the Respondent No.2-Complainant Company even after
resignation that the Company emails were being forwarded
automatically in spite of his termination of employment, in the month of
November, 2018, itself. That therefore, the Petitioner is not in any way
liable or responsible for the alleged offence.

6. That because the present employer has also suspended the Petitioner
for the false FIR that has been lodged against him, and also the
Petitioner's wife who was still working with the Complainant Company
has also been forced to resign, the household of the Petitioner’s family is
suffering, without any source of livelihood and income, more so in light
of the Petitioner’s family has welcomed a new born to the family.

7. It is submitted that in the present matter, the complainant does not wish
to proceed further and expressed interest in closing the matter with
leave of the Hon’ble court, nothing is required to be recovered from the
possession of the petitioner at his instance and all investigations which
were to be carried out are in the hands of the prosecution.

Ramgopal & Anr Versus The state of Madhya Pradesh with Krishnappa &
Ors Versus State of Karnataka 2012
the criminal cases having overwhelmingly and predominating civil flavour stand on
a different footing for the purposes of quashing, particularly the offences arising
from commercial, financial, mercantile, civil, partnership or such like transactions or
the offences arising out of matrimony relating to dowry, etc. or the family disputes
 where the wrong is basically private or personal in nature and the parties have
resolved their entire dispute. In this category of cases, the High Court may quash the
criminal proceedings if in its view, because of the compromise between the
offender and the victim, the possibility of
conviction is remote and bleak and continuation of the criminal case would put the
accused to great oppression and prejudice and extreme injustice would be caused
to him by not quashing the criminal case despite full and complete settlement
and compromise with the victim.

8. That the petitioner has not filed any other similar petition in this Hon'ble
Court or any other Court seeking compromise of FIR NO. 0014/2019
dated 19.01.2019 U/SECTION 66 INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY ACT, 2000
AND 408 IPC REGISTERED WITH P.S.- SPECIAL CELL(SB).

PRAYER

It is, therefore, most humbly and respectfully prayed that this Hon’ble
Court may kindly be pleased to Settle the FIR NO. 0014/2019 dated
19.01.2019 U/SECTION 66 INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY ACT, 2000 AND
408 IPC REGISTERED WITH P.S.- SPECIAL CELL(SB); and

Pass Any Other Order Or Direction As This Hon’ble Court May Deem Fit
And Proper In The Facts And Circumstances Of The Case.

FILLED BY

ADEEL AHMED
Advocate For The Petitioner/Applicant
NEW DELHI
DATE: 16/09/2023