Quashing of FIR and contested settlement where petitioners alleged coercion, writ dismissed for abuse of process and conduct

Abuse of process arising from a prior criminal petition and a contested settlement is central: petitioners later claimed the settlement was procured by coercion after being ordered to deposit disputed funds with the Registrar General - the court treated that claim as an afterthought and a ploy, and found the petitioners' conduct and failure to honour commitments amounted to abuse of process, resulting in dismissal of the writ petition and attendant applications. The court refused to entertain the challenge to the FIR on these conduct grounds.

---

---

Issues: Whether the writ petition seeking quashing of FIR No. 082/2023 should be entertained notwithstanding a pending criminal petition between the same parties and prior court directions/undertaking, and whether the petition amounts to abuse of process of law.

Analysis: The Court examined that a prior criminal miscellaneous petition seeking quashing of the same FIR was pending and that in that petition the petitioners had undertaken, without prejudice to their rights, to deposit the entire alleged amount with the Registrar General pursuant to an order dated 11.09.2023. The Court noted that the present writ petition was filed after that order and that assertions of coercion or threat in relation to the earlier settlement were not previously raised and appear to be afterthoughts. The Court also recorded instances of adjournments and inconsistencies in the petitioners' statements, including an apparent false declaration about non-existence of prior proceedings. The Court applied the principle that a party may not use fresh proceedings to circumvent or renege on commitments made before the Court and that manipulating proceedings or making false statements can constitute abuse of process.

Conclusion: The writ petition is dismissed on the ground that the proceedings constitute an abuse of process and the petitioners' conduct disentitles them to relief; decision is therefore in favour of the Respondent.

Ratio Decidendi: A petition seeking quashing of criminal proceedings may be dismissed as an abuse of process where a related petition is pending and the petitioners seek to evade prior court directions or undertakings through afterthoughts or false statements.

---