IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
Criminal Misc. No. M-20080 of 2009 (O/M).
Date of Decision : August 04, 2009.
Rakesh Bhushan and others.
...... Petitioners.
Versus.
State of Haryana, and another.
..... Respondents.
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH.
Present:- Mr. R. Kartikeya, Advocate, for
Mr. Sanjiv Bansal, Advocate,
for the petitioners.
Mr. Yash Pal Malik, A.A.G. Haryana, A.A.G. Punjab,
for the respondent-State.
Mr. Tushant Deep Garg, Advocate,
for the respondent No. 2.
AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH, J. (ORAL).
The present petition is for quashing of F.I.R. No. 99, dated
04.02.2007 under Section 420, 419, 467, 468, 471, 120-B I.P.C. registered at
Police Station Sadar, Hissar, and all consequential proceedings arising
therefrom, on the basis of a compromise dated 30.06.2009 (Annexure-P-2),
which has been entered into between the parties.
Counsel for the petitioners contends that the present F.I.R. was
lodged by the respondent-Company against the petitioners primarily on the
basis of some misunderstanding in business transaction between the parties,
which was monetary in nature. Now, the dispute has been resolved between
Criminal Misc. No. M-20080 of 2009. -2-
the parties and the complainant is fully satisfied and the claim made therein
also stands satisfied. He on this basis prays for quashing of the present
F.I.R.
Upon notice having been issued, reply by way of short affidavit
of Shri R.P. Jindal, Executive Director, M/s J.S.L. Ltd., O.P. Jindal Marg,
Hisar-respondent No. 2 has been filed in the Court, according to which the
factum of compromise dated 30.06.2009, has been admitted and it has
further been stated that the Company has no objection in case the F.I.R. in
question and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom are quashed.
Counsel for the respondent No. 2-complainant has placed on
record the certified copy of Resolution passed in the meeting of Board of
Directors held on 01.08.2003, wherein Shri R.P. Jindal, Executive Director
was authorised to enter into compromise and take all steps on behalf of
Company, and the same is taken on record. Counsel for the respondent-
Company submits that on the basis of said Resolution, the present
compromise has been entered into between the parties and, therefore, the
F.I.R. in question be quashed alongwith all consequential proceedings.
In view of the above submissions of counsel for the parties and
in view of the fact that primarily it was a business transaction, wherein some
dispute had arisen between the parties and the parties have amicably settled
their dispute, leading to the compromise dated 30.06.2009, which is
appended as Annexure-P-2 with the petition and the affidavit filed to the
petition, it would be in the interest of justice that the F.I.R. in question be
quashed.
Reliance can be made upon the Larger Bench Judgment of this
Court in the case Kulvinder Singh and others Versus State of Punjab and
Criminal Misc. No. M-20080 of 2009. -3-
another 2007(3) R.C.R. (Criminal) 1052, while discussing the scope of
quashing of prosecution on the basis of compromise, by this Court in
exercise of powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C., even in non-compoundable
offences, has held as under :-
“28. The compromise, in a modern society, is the sine qua non
of harmony and orderly behaviour. It is the soul of justice and
if the power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. is used to
enhance such a compromise which, in turn, enhances the social
amity and reduces friction, then it truly is “finest hour of
justice”. Disputes which have their genesis in a matrimonial
discord, landlord-tenant matters, commercial transactions and
other such matters can safely be dealt with by the Court by
exercising its powers under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. in the
event of a compromise, but this is not to say that the power is
limited to such cases. There can never be any such rigid rule to
prescribe the exercise of such power, especially in the absence
of any premonitions to forecast and predict eventualities which
the cause of justice may throw up during the course of a
litigation.
29. The only inevitable conclusion from the above discussion
is that there is no statutory bar under the Cr.P.C. which can
affect the inherent power of this Court under Section 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
under Section 320 of the Cr.P.C., in order to prevent the abuse
of law and to secure the ends of justice.”
Therefore, in view of the discussion above, since the parties
have amicably settled the matter, which is otherwise in the interest of justice
and appears to have been effected to promote peace and harmony amongst
the parties, the instant petition is allowed. Consequently, impugned F.I.R.
Criminal Misc. No. M-20080 of 2009. -4-
No. 99, dated 04.02.2007 under Section 420, 419, 467, 468, 471, 120-B
I.P.C., registered at Police Station Sadar, Hissar, and all other consequential
proceedings arising therefrom are quashed.
(AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH)
JUDGE
August 04, 2009.
sjks.