Crl. Misc. No. M-17563 of 2009 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.
Case No. : Crl. Misc. No. M-17563 of 2009
Date of Decision : August 10, 2009
Rahul Manocha .... Petitioner
Vs.
State of Haryana and another .... Respondents
CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE L. N. MITTAL
* * *
Present : Mr. K. S. Nalwa, Advocate
for the petitioner.
Mr. Pradeep Virk, DAG, Haryana
for respondent no. 1.
Mr. D. K. Singal, Advocate
for respondent no. 2.
* * * L. N. MITTAL, J. (Oral) :
Rahul Manocha has filed this petition under Section 482 of the
Code of Criminal Procedure (in short – Cr.P.C.) for quashing FIR No. 215
dated 12.05.2009, under Sections 406, 420 of the Indian Penal Code (in
short – IPC), registered at Police Station Sector 5, Panchkula (Annexure P-
1), in view of compromise dated 08.06.2009 (Annexure P-2) effected with
complainant-respondent no.2, who has also furnished his affidavit
(Annexure P-4) regarding the compromise.
Reply on behalf of respondent no.1 – State of Haryana filed
today in Court by learned State counsel is taken on record. Copy given to
Crl. Misc. No. M-17563 of 2009 2
the opposite counsel.
Reply on behalf of respondent no.2 has already been filed
wherein the factum of compromise between the parties and receipt of due
amount of Rs.1,40,000/- from the petitioner has been admitted and it has
also been stated by respondent no.2 that he has no objection to the quashing
of the impugned FIR.
Learned counsel for respondent no.2 also states that in view of
compromise, respondent no.2 has no objection to the quashing of the
impugned FIR.
In appropriate cases, FIR can be quashed on the basis of
compromise by exercising power under Section 482 Cr.P.C., even if the
offences are not compoundable. It has been so held by a Full Bench of this
Court in case of Kulwinder Singh vs. State of Punjab reported as 2007
(3) Law Herald (Punjab and Haryana) 2225.
In the instant case, the impugned FIR was result of dispute
over financial transaction. Grievance of complainant-respondent no.2 has
since been satisfied and due amount of Rs.1,40,000/- has since been paid to
him by the petitioner. Respondent no.2 is thus left with no grievance
against the petitioner. It is, therefore, a fit case in which FIR should be
quashed.
In view of the aforesaid, the instant petition is allowed and
impugned FIR No. 215 dated 12.05.2009, under Sections 406, 420 IPC,
registered at Police Station Sector 5, Panchkula (Annexure P-1) is quashed,
along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom.
August 10, 2009 ( L. N. MITTAL ) monika JUDGE