Geo-Chem Laboratories Pvt. Ltd. vs State Of Karnataka & Ors

Rajesh Rai K, J

The Criminal Petition No.200285/2026 is filed under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to quash the proceedings against the petitioner/accused No.3 in Crime No.22/2020 (arising out of P.C.No.11/2018) registered by Sindhanoor Rural Police Station, for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 406, 407, 408, 409, 107, 108 and 115 r/w Section 34 of IPC, pending on the file of learned Addl. Civil Judge and JMFC, Sindhanur, Raichur District.

The Criminal Petition No.200288/2026 is filed under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to quash the proceedings against the petitioner/accused No.3 in Crime No.08/2020 (arising out of P.C.No.213/2017) registered by Sindhanoor Rural Police Station, for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 406, 407, 408, 409, 107, 108 and 115 r/w Section 34 of IPC, pending on the file of learned Addl. Civil Judge and JMFC, Sindhanur.

The Criminal Petition No.200300/2026 is filed under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to quash the proceedings against the petitioner/accused No.3 in Crime No.06/2018 (arising out of P.C.No.214/2017) registered by Sindhanoor Rural Police Station, for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 406, 407, 408, 409, 107, 108 and 115 r/w Section 34 of IPC, pending on the file of learned Addl. Civil Judge and JMFC, Sindhanur.

The Criminal Petition No.200309/2026 is filed under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to quash the proceedings against the petitioner/accused No.2 in Crime No.25/2018 (arising out of P.C.No.215/2017) registered by Sindhanoor Rural Police Station, for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 406, 407, 408, 409, 107, 108 and 115 r/w Section 34 of IPC, pending on the file of learned Addl. Civil Judge and JMFC, Sindhanur.

The Criminal Petition No.200314/2026 is filed under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to quash the proceedings against the petitioner/accused No.2 in Crime No.67/2019 (arising out of P.C.No.180/2018) registered by Sindhanoor Rural Police Station, for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 406, 407, 408, 409, 107, 108 and 115 r/w Section 34 of IPC, pending on the file of learned Addl. Civil Judge and JMFC, Sindhanur

The Criminal Petition No.200317/2026 is filed under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to quash the proceedings against the petitioner/accused No.3 in Crime No.46/2020 (arising out of P.C.No.12/2018) registered by Sindhanoor Rural Police Station, for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 406, 407, 408, 409, 107, 108 and 115 r/w Section 34 of IPC, pending on the file of learned Addl. Civil Judge and JMFC, Sindhanur.

The Criminal Petition No.200318/2026 is filed under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to quash the proceedings against the petitioner/accused No.3 in Crime No.26/2018 (arising out of P.C.No.10/2018) registered by Sindhanoor Rural Police Station, for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 406, 407, 408, 409, 107, 108 and 115 r/w Section 34 of IPC, pending on the file of learned Addl. Civil Judge and JMFC, Sindhanur.

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and respondent No.3-Authorized Officer of IDBI Bank have filed an application under Section 359 r/w Section 528 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, stating that the parties have amicably settled their dispute, hence seeking permission to compound the offences and to quash the proceedings against the petitioner in all the cases. The application is accompanied with the affidavit of representatives of the petitioner and respondent No.3. The application reads as follows:

"The Petitioner and Respondent No. 3 humbly submit as follows:

The Petitioner has preferred this petition being aggrieved by and inter alia seeking quashing of the FIR and proceedings arising out of the private complaint registered in PC No. 11/2018 ('Private Complaint'), dated 28 December 2017, filed by the Respondent No. 3, alleging the commission of offences under Sections 420, 406, 407, 408, 409, 107, 108, 115 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 ("IPC") as against the Petitioner herein, pending on the file of the Ld. Adl. Judicial Magistrate First Class, Sindhanur ("Ld. Magistrate"). FIR has been registered by the Sindhanur Police Station in Crime No. 0022/2020 dated 19 February 2020.

It is humbly submitted that the said disputes between the Parties have been resolved vide the Interim Arbitral Award and Consent terms executed between Respondent No. 3 and the Petitioner on 23 December 2025 (Produced at Annexure F with the Petition) before the Ld. Arbitrator, recording a full and final settlement of all disputes arising out of commercial transactions and are in connection with the Memorandum of Understanding dated 22 December 2007 and containing an unconditional undertaking by Respondent No. 3 to withdraw, cooperate and consent for quashing all criminal proceedings filed against the Petitioner and its present and former directors and employees.

It is submitted that some of the offences alleged in the Private Complaint are non-compoundable in nature but it is compoundable with the permission of this Hon'ble Court. Therefore, it is most humbly prayed by both the parties that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to grant permission to Compound the offences under Sections 420, 406, 408, 409, 107, 108 and 115 of the IPC and be pleased to dispose of the case as Compounded and may kindly be quash the entire proceedings and FIR in the instant matter, with respect to Geochem Laboratories Pvt. Ltd. only.

The Petitioner and Respondent No.3 submit that the compromise is arrived without any force, coercion, misrepresentation and out of free consent as per the Interim Arbitral Award and Settlement Terms dated 23 December 2025 (Produced as Annexure F with the Petition.)

Wherefore, the Petitioner and Respondent No.3 respectfully submit that in view of the above compromise, both the parties pray before this Hon'ble Court to compound the above said offences and to quash the criminal proceeding in PC No. 11/2018, dated 28 December 2017 and the FIR registered by the Sindhanur Police Station in Crime. No.0022/2018 pending before the Ld. Addl. Judicial Magistrate First Class, Sindhanur in respect of the offence under Sections 420, 406, 407, 408, 409, 107, 108, 115 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 by allowing the instant application filed by the both the parties."

It is stated in the affidavit that the parties have amicably settled their dispute before the learned Arbitrator vide order dated 23.12.2025.

The representative of the petitioner is present through video conference in view of the liberty given by this Court and representative of respondent No.3 is present before the Court.

Perused the affidavits accompanied to the application. Though the offences involved in these cases are non-compoundable in nature since the dispute between the parties is private in nature do not impact on the society at large. As such, relying on the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of The State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Laxmi Narayan reported in 2019 5 SCC 688, held at paragraph No.15 as follows:

"15. Considering the law on the point and the other decisions of this Court on the point, referred to hereinabove, it is observed and held as under:

15.1. That the power conferred under Section 482 of the Code to quash the criminal proceedings for the non-compoundable offences under Section 320 of the Code can be exercised having overwhelmingly and predominantly the civil character, particularly those arising out of commercial transactions or arising out of matrimonial relationship or family disputes and when the parties have resolved the entire dispute amongst themselves;

15.2. Such power is not to be exercised in those prosecutions which involved heinous and serious offences of mental depravity or offences like murder, rape, dacoity, etc. Such offences are not private in nature and have a serious impact on society;

15.3. Similarly, such power is not to be exercised for the offences under the special statutes like the Prevention of Corruption Act or the offences committed by public servants while working in that capacity are not to be quashed merely on the basis of compromise between the victim and the offender;

15.4. Offences under Section 307 IPC and the Arms Act, etc. would fall in the category of heinous and serious offences and therefore are to be treated as crime against the society and not against the individual alone, and therefore, the criminal proceedings for the offence under Section 307 IPC and/or the Arms Act, etc. which have a serious impact on the society cannot be quashed in exercise of powers under Section 482 of the Code, on the ground that the parties have resolved their entire dispute amongst themselves. However, the High Court would not rest its decision merely because there is a mention of Section 307 IPC in the FIR or the charge is framed under this provision. It would be open to the High Court to examine as to whether incorporation of Section 307 IPC is there for the sake of it or the prosecution has collected sufficient evidence, which if proved, would lead to framing the charge under Section 307 IPC. For this purpose, it would be open to the High Court to go by the nature of injury sustained, whether such injury is inflicted on the vital/delicate parts of the body, nature of weapons used, etc. However, such an exercise by the High Court would be permissible only after the evidence is collected after investigation and the charge-sheet is filed/charge is framed and/or during the trial. Such exercise is not permissible when the matter is still under investigation. Therefore, the ultimate conclusion in paras 29.6 and 29.7 of the decision of this Court in Narinder Singh [Narinder Singh v. State of Punjab, (2014) 6 SCC 466 : (2014) 3 SCC (Cri) 54] should be read harmoniously and to be read as a whole and in the circumstances stated hereinabove;

15.5 While exercising the power under Section 482 of the Code to quash the criminal proceedings in respect of non-compoundable offences, which are private in nature and do not have a serious impact on society, on the ground that there is a settlement/compromise between the victim and the offender, the High Court is required to consider the antecedents of the accused; the conduct of the accused, namely, whether the accused was absconding and why he was absconding, how he had managed with the complainant to enter into a compromise, etc."

Further the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Ramgopal and another v/s State of Madhya Pradesh reported in (2022) 14 SCC 531 held in paragraph Nos.12 and 13 as under:

"12. The High Court, therefore, having regard to the nature of the offence and the fact that parties have amicably settled their dispute and the victim has willingly consented to the nullification of criminal proceedings, can quash such proceedings in exercise of its inherent powers under Section 482CrPC, even if the offences are non-compoundable. The High Court can indubitably evaluate the consequential effects of the offence beyond the body of an individual and thereafter adopt a pragmatic approach, to ensure that the felony, even if goes unpunished, does not tinker with or paralyse the very object of the administration of criminal justice system.

It appears to us that criminal proceedings involving non-heinous offences or where the offences are pre-dominantly of a private nature, can be annulled irrespective of the fact that trial has already been concluded or appeal stands dismissed against conviction. Handing out punishment is not the sole form of delivering justice. Societal method of applying laws evenly is always subject to lawful exceptions. It goes without saying, that the cases where compromise is struck post-conviction, the High Court ought to exercise such discretion with rectitude, keeping in view the circumstances surrounding the incident, the fashion in which the compromise has been arrived at, and with due regard to the nature and seriousness of the offence, besides the conduct of the accused, before and after the incidence. The touchstone for exercising the extra-ordinary power under Section 482 CrPC would be to secure the ends of justice. There can be no hard-and-fast line constricting the power of the High Court to do substantial justice. A restrictive construction of inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC may lead to rigid or specious justice, which in the given facts and circumstances of a case, may rather lead to grave injustice. On the other hand, in cases where heinous offences have been proved against perpetrators, no such benefit ought to be extended, as cautiously observed by this Court in Narinder Singh & Ors vs. State of Punjab & Ors and Laxmi Narayan (Supra)."

Collocating the findings of the Hon'ble Apex court in the above judgments to the facts and circumstance of this case, since the dispute involved in this case is purely private in nature and the parties have settled their disputes amicably, I am of the considered view that the application filed by the parties is liable to be allowed. Accordingly, the parties are permitted to compound the offences. Hence, I proceed to pass the following:

ORDER

(a) The petitions are allowed.

(b) The proceedings against the petitioner/accused - Geo-Chem Laboratories Pvt. Ltd in Crime.No.22/2020 (arising out of P.C No.11/2018), in Crime.No.08/2020 (arising out of P.C No.213/2017), in Crime.No.06/2018 (arising out of P.C No.214/2017), in Crime.No.25/2018 (arising out of P.C No.215/2017), in Crime.No.67/2019 (arising out of P.C No.180/2018), in Crime.No.46/2020 (arising out of P.C No.12/2018) and in Crime.No.26/2018 (arising out of P.C No.10/2018) registered by Sindhanoor Rural Police Station, pending on the file of learned Addl. Civil Judge and JMFC, Sindhanur, Raichur, are hereby set-aside.

Registry is directed to send back the TCR along with certified copy of this judgment to the concerned Court, forthwith.