Please Log in / Register to access the full text of this judgment and the entire database
(2021) Law Today Live Doc. Id. 16229
Decided on: 27.04.2021
Present:
Mr. V.P. Arora, Advocate for the petitioner.
Ms. Rashmi Attri, A.A.G., Punjab. Mr. Neeraj Malhotra, Advocate for respondent No.2.
(Heard through V.C.)
Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Sections 420, 120-B -- Information Technology Act, 2000 (21 of 2000), Section 66 -- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 482 – Fraud -- Compromise quashing of FIR -- After considering the nature of offences allegedly committed and the fact that both the parties have amicably settled their dispute, continuance of criminal prosecution would be an exercise in futility, as the chances of ultimate conviction are bleak -- Petition allowed and FIR and all subsequent proceedings arising out of the same are quashed qua petitioners.
(Para 6, 7)
***
JAISHREE THAKUR, J. (ORAL) –
1. This petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing of FIR No.85 dated 13.06.2019 under Sections 420, 120-B of IPC and Section 66 of Information Technology Act, registered at Police Station Bullowal, District Hoshiarpur and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom in view of the compromise arrived at between the parties.
2. The aforesaid FIR has been registered on the statement of respondent No.2/complainant on the allegation of fraud. Now with the intervention of respectable persons, the matter has been amicably compromised between the parties and they have resolved their disputes and differences.
3. Keeping in view the fact that the parties have entered into a compromise, they were directed to appear before the Illaqa Magistrate for getting their statements recorded in support of the compromise. In pursuance of the direction, a report has been received from Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Hoshiarpur that the compromise arrived at between the parties is genuine and without any pressure, coercion or undue influence.
4. Learned State counsel on instructions from the Investigating Officer and learned counsel for the complainant/respondent No.2 admit the factum of compromise and the counsel for the respondent-State submits that in case the parties have indeed settled their dispute, the State would have no objection to the quashing of the FIR, in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court.
5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record.
6. In a decision, based on compromise, none of the parties is a loser. Rather, a compromise not only brings peace and harmony between the parties to a dispute, but also restores tranquility in the society. After considering the nature of offences allegedly committed and the fact that both the parties have amicably settled their dispute, continuance of criminal prosecution would be an exercise in futility, as the chances of ultimate conviction are bleak.
7. Consequently, keeping in view the fact that the dispute has been amicably settled and in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in 'Narinder Singh and others vs. State of Punjab and another, (2014) 6 SCC 466 = (2014) Law Today Live Doc. Id. 12622 = 2014 L.A.R. (e-Suppl.) 1', this petition is allowed and FIR No.85 dated 13.06.2019 under Sections 420, 120-B of IPC and Section 66 of Information Technology Act, registered at Police Station Bullowal, District Hoshiarpur and all subsequent proceedings arising out of the same are quashed qua petitioners.
Petition allowed.
********