Sukhdev and another vs State of Haryana and another

Vijender Singh Malik, J.—Shiv Kumar, the petitioner has brought this petition under the provisions of section 482 Cr.P.C., for quashing of FIR No. 242 dated 19.07.2011 registered at Police Station City Barnala, Punjab, for an offence punishable under sections 406, 407 and 120B IPC alongwith all consequential proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner and the complainant Nishant Kumar, respondent no.2 are in the same business and they have business dealings. According to him, they have settled their disputes amicably and the compromise entered into between the two is Annexure P-2.

The complainant is present before me. He is represented by Mr. Tribhawan Singh, Advocate. He is identified by ASI Nazir Mohd. Police Station Economic Offences Wing Barnala as Nishant Kumar, complainant of the case. The complainant confirms the fact of compromise.

The offence punishable u/s 407 IPC is compoundable under the provisions of section 320 Cr.P.C. without the permission of the court while the offence punishable u/s 406 IPC is compoundable under the said provisions with permission of the court. The only other offence in this case is punishable u/s 120B IPC which would go with the main offence.

Even if it would have been a non-compoundable offence, still this court could quash the FIR and the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise in view of a decision of Larger Bench of this Court in Kulwinder Singh v. State of Punjab 2007(3) R.C.R. (Cri) 1052 where it is laid down as under:

The only inevitable conclusion from the above discussion is that there is no statutory bar under the Code of Criminal Procedure which can affect the inherent power of this Court u/s 482. Further, the same cannot be limited to matrimonial cases alone and the Court has the wide power to quash the proceedings even in non-compoundable offences notwithstanding the bar u/s 320 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, in order to prevent the abuse of law and to secure the ends of justice.

Before accepting the compromise and ordering for quashing the FIR in question, the court has to satisfy that the compromise is genuine and that it has not been brought about by any pressure upon the complainant. It has also to satisfy that the quashing of the FIR would serve the interest of justice.

As is evident from the facts noticed above, it appears that the compromise in this case is genuine and reasonable and it has not been brought about by any pressure upon the complainant and it would serve the ends of justice. For the reasons recorded above the petition is accepted. FIR No. 242 dated 19.07.2011 registered at Police Station City Barnala, Punjab, for an offence punishable under sections 120B, 406 and 407 IPC alongwith all consequential proceedings arising therefrom is quashed.