Allowed¶73

Shakti Dubey v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC18 Jul 2024CRMP/749/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Quashing of FIR under Section 482 CrPC on settlement/compromise; FIR Crime No. 58/2023, P.S. Azad Chowk, Raipur; Sections 420 and 120-B IPC; overwhelmingly civil/commercial dispute over Rs. 91,81,693/-; compromise deed dated 22/02/2023; payment via HDFC Bank cheque No. 000186; relies on BS Joshi (2003) 4 SCC 675, Narinder Singh (2014) 6 SCC 466, Gian Singh (2012) 10 SCC 303; High Court of Chhattisgarh, Bilaspur; CRMP No. 613 of 2023; CRMP No. 749 of 2023; both petitions allowed.

What did the court decide?

Both Criminal Misc. Petitions allowed; FIR of Crime No. 58 of 2023 registered at Police Station Azad Chowk, Dist- Raipur quashed with respect to the present petitioners. ¶73

Shakti Dubey Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Cheating and Forgery | Chhattisgarh HC (2024)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Both Criminal Misc. Petitions allowed; FIR of Crime No. 58 of 2023 registered at Police Station Azad Chowk, Dist- Raipur quashed with respect to the present petitioners.

¶73

Issue for consideration

Whether the FIR of Crime No. 58/2023 registered on 21/02/2023 at P.S. Azad Chowk, Raipur for offences under Sections 420 and 120-B of I.P.C. should be quashed in exercise of inherent powers under Section 482 of the CrPC on the ground of the compromise arrived at between the parties. +1 more

¶30

Court's answer

In view of the parties' completed settlement, the verified compromise deed and the law laid down by the Supreme Court, the Court concluded that the object of law is not only to punish the culprit but to maintain peace, tranquility and harmony in the society.

¶70

Ratio / Principle

Exercising its inherent powers under Section 482 of the CrPC, the Court quashed the FIR of Crime No. 58 of 2023 registered at Police Station Azad Chowk, Raipur for offences under Sections 420 and 120-B of IPC against Vipin Mirani, Rajesh Kumar Mirani, Arun Kumar Mirani, Kanwaljeet Singh Khurana (Cr.MP No. 613 of 2023) and Shakti Dubey.

¶72

Key takeaways

The Court took into consideration that the complainant had already settled the dispute and verified the compromise deed arrived at between the parties, as a factual premise for quashing.ratio¶70

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Chhattisgarh, Bilaspur — Division Bench of Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice and Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, Judge (author), decision dated 19.07.2024 — allows CRMP Nos. 613 and 749 of 2023 jointly. Both Criminal Misc. Petitions sought quashing, under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, of the FIR of Crime No. 58/2023 registered on 21/02/2023 at P.S. Azad Chowk, Raipur for offences under Sections 420 and 120-B of I.P.C., lodged after complainant Siddharth Singh Parihar (of R.B.P. Energy Pvt. Ltd.) alleged Rs. 91,81,693/- outstanding against the Rawmate Solutions partners (Vipin Mirani, Rajesh Kumar Mirani, Arun Kumar Mirani, Kanwaljeet Singh Khurana) and petitioner Shakti Dubey over solar energy pump business transactions. Following FIR registration, the parties settled their dispute and executed a deed of compromise on 22/02/2023, paying the full outstanding amount through HDFC Bank cheque No. 000186 dated 22/02/2023, whose receipt the respondent did not dispute; the complainant verified the compromise deed. Relying on BS Joshi v. State of Haryana (2003) 4 SCC 675, Narinder Singh v. State of Punjab (2014) 6 SCC 466 and Gian Singh v. State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303, the Court held that the object of law is not only to punish the culprit but to maintain peace, tranquility and harmony in society, and quashed the FIR with respect to all petitioners.

¶1

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶4

CRMP No. 613 of 2023

¶5

Vipin Mirani S/o - Late Manilal Mirani Aged About 63 Years Through Its Partner - M/s Rawmate Solutions, R/o - House No. 04/05, Ward No. 28, Silver Spring, Geetanjali Nagar, Shankar Nagar, Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

¶6

Rajesh Kumar Mirani S/o - Late Manilal Mirani Aged About 62 Years Through Its Partner - M/s Rawmate Solutions, R/o - Gola Bidi Works, Sadar Bazar Dhamtari, District : Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh

¶7

Arun Kumar Mirani S/o - Late Manilal Mirani Aged About 59 Years Through Its Partner - M/s Rawmate Solutions, R/o - 159, Amapara Ward, Gola Bidi Premises, Dhamtari, District : Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh

¶8

Kanwaljeet Singh Khurana S/o - Late Jawant Singh Khurana Aged About 61 Years Through Its Partner- M/s Rawmate Solutions, R/o - House No. 84, Ward No. 32, Anand Nagar, Raipur, Tahsil And District - Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

¶9

---- Petitioners

¶10

Versus

¶11

The State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Station House Officer, Police Station - Azad Chowk, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

¶12

Siddharth Singh Parihar S/o - S. B. Singh Parihar Aged About 32 Years Authorized Person Of R. B. P. Energy Pvt. Ltd., Address - 303, Amapara, Ghasidas Plaza Raipur, Azad Chowk, Tahsil And District - Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

¶13

---- Respondent

¶14

CRMP No. 749 of 2023

¶15

Shakti Dubey S/o Shri B.R. Dubey Aged About 38 Years R/o 317-329, 3rd Floor, Magneto Offizio, Magneto Mall, Labhahandi, G.E. Road, Dist. Raipur (C.G.)

¶16

---- Petitioner

¶17

Versus

¶18

State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, P.S. Azad

¶19

¶20

Chowk, Raipur (C.G.)

¶21

Siddharth Singh Parihar S/o S.B. Singh Parihar Aged About 32 Years Authorized Person Of R.B.P. Energy Pvt. Ltd., Address- 303, Amapara, Ghasidas Plaza Raipur, Azad Chowk, Tahsil And Dist. Raipur (C.G.)

¶22

---- Respondent

¶23

(Cause title taken by CIS)

¶24

For petitioners : Ms. Fouzia Mirza, Advocate (in Cr.MP No. 613/2023) Mr. Apurv Goyal, Advocate (in Cr.MP No. 749/2023) For Res./State : Mr. Sangharsh Pandey, Govt. Advocate

¶25

Division Bench: Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon’ble Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, Judge Order on Board

¶26

Per Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, Judge

¶27

19.07.2024

¶28

1. Heard Ms. Fouzia Mirza, learned counsel for the petitioners in Cr.MP No. 613/2023 and Mr. Apurv Goyal, learned counsel for the petitioners in Cr.MP No. 749/2023 and Mr. Sangharsh Pandey, Govt. Advocate for the Respondent/ State.

¶29

2. Both these petitions are arising out of the same crime no. and challenge are also the same crime no. and therefore, both these petitions are being heard and decided together.

¶30

3. These petitions have been filed under 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, for quashing of the FIR of Crime No. 58/2023 registered on 21/02/2023 at P.S. Azad Chowk, Raipur for the offence under Sections 420 and 120-B of I.P.C. against the petitioners on the ground of compromise arrived at between the

¶31

¶32

parties.

¶33

4. The brief facts of the case are that, the complainant Shiddharth Singh Parihar is the General Manager of R.B.P. Energy (India) Pvt. Ltd., Raipur who engaged in the business of establishment of Solar Energy Plants and its maintenance. The business concerned of the accused persons are also engaged in the same business of establishment and maintenance of solar energy plants in the name and style of Rawmate Solutions. The firm of the accused persons have got a work order from the Chhattisgarh Government on 15/06/2018 for establishment of Solar Energy Pump at various places within Chhattisgarh State and then he contacted with the complainant and they exchanged their business transactions with respect to the establishment of Solar Energy Pumps. During the work, some dispute arose between the parties which were not resolved even after their repeated efforts and it is said by the complainant that an amount of Rs. 91,81,693/- is outstanding against the accused persons and since the dispute was not resolved by the accused persons and the amount has not been paid to the complainant, the report has been lodged, on which the FIR has been registered on 21/02/2023 against the accused persons for the aforesaid offence at P.S. Azad Chowk, Raipur which is under challenge in the present petitions.

¶34

5. After registration of the FIR against the accused persons, the petitioners of both the petitions and the respondent no. 2 have

¶35

¶36

settled their dispute and entered into a compromise on 22/02/2023 and a deed of compromise was also executed on the said date. In compliance of the said compromise, the petitioners have paid the amount of Rs. 91,81,693/- to the complainant through the cheque of HDFC Bank, G.E. Road, Raipur Branch vide Cheque No. 000186 dated 22/02/2023. The receiving of the amount through the said cheque has not been disputed by the respondent and submitted that they have entered into compromise and they have no object in quashing of the FIR of Crime No. 58/2023 registered against the present petitioners in both the petitions at Azad Chowk Police Station, Dist- Raipur. The relevant conditions of compromise deed (Annexure-P/12) dated 22/02/2023 are reproduced hereinbelow for ready reference:-

¶37

उपरो�्ሹ समझौ�ते�ना�म� को� निनाष्प�नि�ते कोरोना� को� स�नि�्቎ नि��रोण इस ्ቚको�रो है� निको ्ቚथम प� आरो.बी�.प�. एनाቌኍ! (इቄኌ#$या�) ्ቚ�या��ट लि(निमट�$, पते�- 303, गुरूघा�स��स प्(�ቌኍ�, आम�प�रो�, थ�ना� आቌኍ��चौ�को, रो�यापरो छ.गु. को0 ओरो स� अलि3को4 ते व्याቄኌ67 fl}kFkZ लिस�है परिरोहै�रो, उ्቞ 32 �्ቧ;, निपते� ቦኍ� एस.बी�. परिरोहै�रो ቛኋ�रो� Fkkuk-आቌኍ�� चौ�को, रो�यापरो (छ.गु.) को0 पलि(स म> को0 गुई नि@को�याते को� आ3�रो परो Fkkuk आቌኍ�� चौ�को, रो�यापरो (छ.गु.) को0 पलि(स ቛኋ�रो� निቛኋते�या प� ए�� ते4ते�या प� को� नि�रु्ቍ अपरो�3 म��को-58/2023 अन्तेगु;ते 3�रो�-420, 120(बी�) भा�.�.नि�. को� प�ቌኍ�बी्ቍ निकोया� गुया� है�। इसको� पश्चौ�तेH इस समझौ�ते�ना�म> ds समस्ते प�को�रोJ को� परिरोनिचौतेJ को0 समझौ�ई@ परो ्ቚथम प� को� निቛኋते�या ए�� ते4ते�या प� स� निबीना� निकोस� भाया, �बी�� ए�� (�(चौ को� आपस� समझौ�ते� है� गुया� है�। इस स�बी�3 म> याहै समझौ�ते�ना�म� निनाम्नालि(लिLते @तेM� को� अ3�ना निनाष्प�नि�ते निकोया� ቌኍ� रोहै� है� :-

¶38

01 . याहै निको, इस समझौ�ते�ना�म� को� समस्ते प�को�रोJ को� ना�म ए�� पते� उपरो�्ሹ�ना*स�रो सत्या ए�� सहै� है�।

¶39

02. याहै निको, �स्तेቄኌस्थनिते को� अनास�रो निቛኋते�या प� ቛኋ�रो� @�सना को0 स�रो स*ቌኍ(� या�ቌኍना� को�

¶40

¶41

अन्तेगु;ते ቌኍ�रो� निकोया� गुया� ट�#$रो को� को�या; ्ቚ�्቎ है�ना� परो ्ቚथम प� को� बीस्तेरो ए�� ना�रो�याणपरो थमप� लिቌኍ(J म> स�(रो एनाቌኍ! प�प स्थ�निपते कोरोना� को� को�या; नि�या� गुया� थ�। लिቌኍसको� अनास�रो ቛኋ�रो� को�या; निकोया� गुया� थ� तेथ� को�या; को� स�बी�3 म> निቛኋते�या प� को� निबी( ቌኍ�रो� निकोया� गुया� थ�। इस�्ቚ

¶42

को�रो ्ቚथम प� ቛኋ�रो� निቛኋते�या प� को� निना�O@�नास�रो ्ቚ�्቎ उपरो�्ሹ को�याM� म> निቛኋते�या प� को� निना�O@ परो ते4ते�या प� को�पना� को� स�(रो प�ना( (गु�या� गुया� थ�। उपरो�्ሹ को�या; को� निनाष्प�नि�ते कोरोना� को� स�बी�लि3ते निबी( को0 रो�नि@ म> स� 91,81,693/- (अ�रो� इन्को�न्�> (�L इ6या�स� हैቌኍ�रो छहै स� नितेरो�ना�> रूपया�) को0 रो�नि@ को� भागुते�ना को� स�बी�3 म> ्ቚथम प� को� निቛኋते�या प� तेथ� ते4ते�या प� स� मतेभा � उत्प्ቐ है� गुया� थ�। लिቌኍस स�बी�3 म> ्ቚथम प� को0 ओरो स� अलि3को4 ते व्यानि्ሹ लिस्ቍ�थ; लिस�है परिरोहै�रो ቛኋ�रो� थ�ना� आቌኍ�� चौ�को, रो�यापरो (छ.गु.) को0 पलि(स म> निቛኋते�या ए�� ते4ते�या प� को� नि�रू्ቍ नि@को�याते को0 गुई थ�। लिቌኍस परो थ�ना� आቌኍ�� चौ�को, रो�यापरो (छ.गु.) को0 पलि(स ቛኋ�रो� निቛኋते�या ए�� ते4ते�या प� को� नि�रू्ቍ अपरो�3 म��को-58/2023 अन्तेगु;ते 3�रो�-420, 120 (बी�) भा�.�.नि�. को� ्ቚकोरोण प�ቌኍ�बी्ቍ निकोया� गुया� है�। �ते;म�ना म> ्ቚथम प� को� निቛኋते�या ए�� ते4ते�या प� स� समझौ�ते� है�ना� को� आ3�रो परो निቛኋते�या प� ቛኋ�रो� उसको� एचौ.$�.एफ.स�. बीRको, @�L� ቌኍ�.ई. रो�ड़, रो�यापरो (छ.गु.) ቄኌस्थते बीRको L�ते� को� चौ�को म��को-000186, नि�ना��निकोते-22/02/2023 को0मते� 91,81,693/- (अ�रो� इन्को�न्�> (�L इ6या�स� हैቌኍ�रो छहै स� नितेरो�ना�> रूपया�) को� भागुते�ना है�ते्ቚ थम प� को� इस समझौ�ते�ना�म� को� निनाष्प��ना को� समया ्ቚ��ना निकोया� ቌኍ� रोहै� है�। लिቌኍस स�बी�3 म>्ቚ थम प� को� याहै अलि3को�रो है�गु� निको, �है उपरो�्ሹ चौ�को ्ቅम��को-000186 को� भागुते�ना ्ቚ�नि्቎ है�ते* अपना� बीRको L�ते� म> ्ቚस्तेते कोरो सको�। लिቌኍसको� भागुते�ना अ��यागु� को0 समस्ते लिቌኍम्म � �रो� निቛኋते�या प� ए�� ते4ते�या प� को0 है�।

¶43

03 . याहै निको, इस� तेरोहै चौT�निको �ते;म�ना म> ्ቚथम प� को� निቛኋते�या ए�� ते4ते�या प� स� थ�ना�- आቌኍ�� चौ�को, रो�यापरो (छ.गु.) को� अपरो�3 म��को-58/2023 अन्तेगु;ते 3�रो� 420, 120 (बी�) भा�.�.नि�. को� ्ቚकोरोण म> निबीना� निकोस� भाया, �बी�� ए�� (�(चौ को� आपस� रो�ቌኍ�ना�म� है� गुया� है�। इस को�रोण्ቚ थम प� ቛኋ�रो� उपरो�्ሹ चौ�को ्ቅम��को-000186 को� भागुते�ना ्ቚ�्቎ है�ना� को� पश्चौ�तेH उ्ሹ ्ቚकोरोण म> थ�ना�- आቌኍ�� चौ�को, रो�यापरो (छ.गु.) को0 पलि(स को� ्ቚकोरोण म> निቛኋते�या ए�� ते4ते�या प� स� समझौ�ते� है�ना� को0 सTचौना� �� ቌኍ��गु� तेथ� निቛኋते�या ए�� ते4ते�या प� को� नि�रू्ቍ �ቌኍ; उपरो�्ሹ अपरो�3 म��को-58/23 को� समझौ�ते� को� आ3�रो परो सम�्቎ कोरोना� को� स�बी�3 म> म�नाना�या छ7�सगुढ़ उच्चौ न्या�या�(या निबी(�सपरो को� सम� 3�रो�-482 �.्ቚ .स�. को� आ� � ना प्ቔ को0्ቚ स्तेनिते को0 ቌኍ��गु�। इस� ्ቚको�रो आ�श्याकोते� को� अना*रूप निቛኋते�या ए�� ते4ते�या प� ቛኋ�रो� स�म

¶44

¶45

न्या�या�(या म> ቌኍम�नाते या�निचौको� ्ቚस्तेते कोरोना� परो ्ቚथम प� ए�� उसको� अलि3को4 ते व्यानि्ሹ को0 ओरो स� उपरो�्ሹ स�बी�3 म> अना�पलि7 ्ቚस्तेते को0 ቌኍ��गु�।

¶46

04 . याहै निको, �स्तेቄኌस्थनिते को� अनास�रो ्ቚथम प� को0 ओरो स� अलि3को4 ते व्यानि्ሹ लिस्ቍ�थ; लिस�है परिरोहै�रो, उ्቞ 32 �्ቧ;, निपते� ቦኍ� एस.बी�. परिरोहै�रो ቛኋ�रो� निቛኋते�या ए�� ते4ते�या प� को� नि�रू्ቍ थ�ना� आቌኍ�� चौ�को, रो�यापरो (छ.गु.) को0 पलि(स म> नि@को�याते को0 गुई थ�। इस को�रोण ्ቚथम प� को� निना�O@ परो उसको� अलि3को4 ते व्यानि्ሹ लिस्ቍ�थ; लिस�है परिरोहै�रो ቛኋ�रो� निቛኋते�या ए�� ते4ते�या प� को� नि�रू्ቍ समझौ�ते� को� आ3�रो परो ्ቚकोरोण को0 सम�नि्቎ है�ते* अथ�� ቌኍम�नाते या�निचौको� म> अना�पलि7 ्ቚस्तेते निकोया� ቌኍ�ना� है�ते स�म न्या�या�(याJ म> उपቄኌस्थते है�कोरो आ� � ना प्ቔ ए�� @पथप्ቔ को0 ्ቚस्तेनिते को0 ቌኍ��गु� तेथ� आ�श्याकोते�नास�रो अपना� कोथना �ቌኍ; कोरो�या� ቌኍ��गु�। उ्ሹ बी�ते को0 अनिभास्��को4 निते को� स�बी�3 म> लिस्ቍ�थ; लिस�है परिरोहै�रो ቛኋ�रो� इस समझौ�ते�ना�म> म� बीते�रो गु��है अपना� हैस्ते��रो निकोया� ቌኍ� रोहै� है�।

¶47

05. याहै निको, इस� ्ቚको�रो निቛኋते�या प� ए�� ते4ते�या प� को0 ओरो स� ्ቚथम प� को� थ�ना�- आቌኍ�� चौ�को, रो�यापरो (छ.गु.) को0 पलि(स म> �ቌኍ; अपरो�3 म��को-58/2023 अन्तेगु;ते 3�रो� 420, 120 (बी�) भा�.�.नि�. को� ्ቚकोरोण म> हैXया� समझौ�ते� को� आ3�रो परो निቛኋते�या प� को� बीRको L�ते� को� ्ቚथम प� को� भागुते�ना है�ते नि�या� गुया� उपरो�्ሹ चौ�को म��को-000186, नि�ना��निकोते- 22/02/2023 को0मते� 91,81,693/- (अ�रो� इन्को�न्�> (�L इ6या�स� हैቌኍ�रो छहै स� नितेरो�ना�> रूपया�) को� भा*गुते�ना को0 समस्ते लिቌኍम्म � �रो� निቛኋते�या प� ए�� ते4ते�या प� को0 है�गु�। यानि� निकोस� भा� ቄኌस्थनिते म> उपरो�्ሹ चौ�को्ቅ

¶48

म��को-000186, नि�ना��निकोते-22/02/2023 को0मते� 91,81,693/- (अ�रो� इन्को�न्�> (�L इ6या�स� हैቌኍ�रो छहै स� नितेरो�ना�> रूपया�) को� भा*गुते�ना ्ቚथम प� को� ्ቚ�्቎ नाहैY है�ते� है� ते� ऐस� �@� म> उपरो�्ሹ को4 त्या ्ቚथम प� को� ्ቚनिते छ( को� को4 त्या म�ना� ቌኍ��गु�।

¶49

06 . याहै निको, इस समझौ�ते�ना�म> को0 @तेO इस समझौ�ते�ना�म� को� समस्ते प�को�रो� परो पTण; रूप स� बी�3नाको�रो� है�, यानि� इस समझौ�ते�ना�म� को� निकोस� भा� प�को�रो ቛኋ�रो� समझौ�ते�ना�म> को0 निकोस� भा� @ते; को� निनाष्प��ना कोरोना� म> उ्ቤघा�ना अथ�� है�(� है��(� निकोया� ቌኍ�ते� है� ते� ऐस� �@� म> प�निड़ते प� को� याहै अलि3को�रो है�गु� निको �है अन्या प� को� नि�रू्ቍ को�नाTना� को�या;��है� कोरो सको�। इसको0 समस्ते लिቌኍम्म � �रो� अन्या प� को0 है�गु�।

¶50

07. याहै निको, इस समझौ�ते�ना�म� को� ्ቚथम प� आरो.बी�.प�. एनाቌኍ! (इቄኌ#$या�) ्ቚ�या��ट लि(निमट�$,

¶51

¶52

रो�म�ट सल्या*@न्स भा�गु��रो� फम; ए�� आईको]ना स�(रो-ई.एना. प]�रो ट�6ना�(]लिቌኍस �.लि(. को�पना� को� मध्या आपस� सहैमनिते स� निनाष्प�नि�ते निकोया� ቌኍ� रोहै� है�। इस को�रोण इस समझौ�ते�ना�म> को0 समस्ते @तेO थम प� आरो.बी�.प�. एनाቌኍ! (इቄኌ#$या�) ्ቚ�या��ट लि(निमट�$ को� समस्ते $�यारो�6टरो, रो�म�ट सल्या*@न्स भा�गु��रो� फम; को� समस्ते भा�गु��रो ए�� आईको]ना स�(रो-ई.एना. प]�रो ट�6ना�(]लिቌኍस ्ቚ�.लि(. को�पना� को� समस्ते $�यारो�6टरोJ परो सम�ना रूप स� बी�3नाको�रो� है�।

¶53

08. याहै निको, इस समझौ�ते�ना�म� को� समस्ते प�को�रोJ को� मध्या इस समझौ�ते�ना�म� को� निनाष्प�नि�ते कोरोना� को� स�बी�3 म> को�ई भा� �*रोनिभास�लि3 नाहैY है�।

¶54

09 . याहै निको, सनि�3� को0 दृनि` स� इस समझौ�ते�ना�म� को� को ( �� ्ቚनितेयाJ म> निनाष्प�नि�ते निकोया� ቌኍ� रोहै� है�, लिቌኍसम> स� एको मT(्ቚनिते ्ቚथम प� ቛኋ�रो� ए�� अन्या मT(्ቚनिते निቛኋते�या ए�� ते4ते�या प� को0 आपस� सहैमनिते स� निकोस� एको प� ቛኋ�रो� 3�रिरोते को0 ቌኍ� रोहै� है�।

¶55

6. Hon’ble Supreme court in the matter of BS Joshi and others Vs

¶56

State of Haryana and another reported in (2003) 4 SCC 675, held as under:-

¶57

“If for the purpose of securing the ends of justice, quashing of FIR becomes necessary, Section 320 would not be a bar to the exercise of power of quashing. It is, however, a different matter depending upon the facts and circumstances of each case whether to exercise or not such a power.

¶58

Thus, the High Court on exercise of its inherent power can quash criminal proceedings or FIR or complaint and section 320 of the Code does not limit or affect the powers under Section 482 of the Code.”

¶59

7. Further , in the matter of Narinder Singh and others Vs State of

¶60

Punjab reported in (2014) 6, SCC 466, Hon’ble Supreme court has held that: -

¶61

“29.4 On the other hand, those criminal cases having overwhelmingly and pre-dominantly civil character, particularly those arising out of commercial

¶62

¶63

transactions or arising out of matrimonial relationship or family disputes should be quashed when the parties have resolved their entire disputes among themselves.

¶64

29.5 While exercising its powers, the High Court is to examine as to whether the possibility of conviction is remote and bleak and continuation of criminal cases would put the accused to great oppression and prejudice and extreme injustice would be caused to him by not quashing the criminal cases.”

¶65

8. Further, in the matter of Gian Singh Vs State of Punjab and

¶66

another reported in (2012) 10 SCC 303, Honble Supreme court has held:

¶67

“The position that emerges from the above discussion can be summarized thus: the power of the High Court in quashing a criminal proceeding or FIR or complaint in exercise of its inherent jurisdiction is distinct and different from the power given to a criminal court for compounding the offences under Section 320 of the Code. Inherent power is of wide plenitude with no statutory limitation but it has to be exercised in accord with the guideline engrafted in such power viz; (i) to secure the ends of justice or (ii) to prevent abuse of the process of any Court. In what cases power to quash the criminal proceeding or complaint or F.I.R may be exercised where the offender and victim have settled their dispute would depend on the facts and circumstances of each case and no category can be prescribed. However, before exercise of such power, the High Court must have due regard to the nature and gravity of the crime. Heinous and serious offences of mental depravity or offences like murder rape, dacoity, etc. cannot be fittingly quashed even though the victim or victim’s family and the offender have settled the dispute. Such offences are not private in nature and have serious impact on society. Similarly, any compromise between the victim and offender in relation to the offences under special statutes like Prevention of Corruption Act or the offences committed by public

¶68

¶69

servants while working in that capacity etc; cannot provide for any basis for quashing criminal proceedings involving such offences. But the criminal cases having overwhelmingly and pre-dominatingly civil flavour stand on different footing for the purposes of quashing, particularly the offences arising from commercial, financial, mercantile, civil, partnership or such like transactions or the offences arising out of matrimony relating to dowry, etc. or the family disputes where the wrong is basically private or personal in nature and the parties have resolved their entire dispute. In this category of cases, High Court may quash criminal proceedings if in its view, because of the compromise between the offender and victim, the possibility of conviction is remote and bleak and continuation of criminal case would put accused to great oppression and prejudice and extreme injustice would be caused to him by not quashing the criminal case despite full and complete settlement and compromise with the victim. In other words, the High Court must consider whether it would be unfair or contrary to the interest of justice to continue with the criminal proceeding or continuation of the criminal proceeding would tantamount to abuse of process of law despite settlement and compromise between the victim and wrongdoer and whether to secure the ends of justice, it is appropriate that criminal case is put to an end and if the answer to the above question(s) is in affirmative, the High Court shall be well within its jurisdiction to quash the criminal proceedings.”

¶70

9. Taking into consideration the fact that the complainant has already settled the dispute and verified the compromise deed arrived at between the parties, and also in view of the above cited judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, this Court is of the considered opinion that object of law is not only to punish the culprit but to maintain peace, tranquility and harmony in the society. Therefore, in the aforesaid circumstances of the case, as well as in view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme

¶71

¶72

Court, this Court in exercise of its inherent powers under Section 482 of the CrPC, quash the FIR of Crime No.58 of 2023 registered at the Police Station- Azad Chowk, Raipur for the offence under Sections 420 and 120-B of IPC against the petitioner No. 1 Vipin Mirani, petitioner No. 2 Rajesh Kumar Mirani, petitioner No. 3 Arun Kumar Mirani, petitioner No. 4 Kanwaljeet Singh Khurana (petitioners in Cr.MP No. 613 of 2023 and Petitioner No. 1 Shakti Dubey (petitioner in Cr.MP No. 720 of 2023).

¶73

10. Both the Criminal Misc. Petitions are allowed to the extent indicated hereinabove. The FIR of Crime No. 58 of 2023 registered at Police Station. Azad Chowk, Dist- Raipur is quashed with respect to the present petitioners.

¶74

Sd/-

¶75

Sd/-

¶76

(Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha)

¶77

Judge

¶78

Chief Justice

¶79

Sagrika

Shakti Dubey v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shakti Dubey v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Naval Kishore Shukla Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Food Corporation of India Vs B. L. Yadav

M/S Chhattisgarh Engineering Vs Executive Engineer

Vinod Kumar Mishra Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Vipin Mirani Vs the State of Chhattisgarh

Ramjeet Yadav Vs Mahesh Prasad Yadav