Allowed

Rajesh Kumar v. State of Punjab and Anr.

Punjab & Haryana HC5 Dec 2014CRM-M/26422/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought quashing of an FIR for cheating and criminal breach of trust citing a compromise between parties. The court found the settlement voluntary and genuine. Quashing the FIR was considered a private dispute resolved amicably, making further prosecution futile.

What did the court decide?

FIR No.178 dated 26.11.2008 and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom are quashed.

Rajesh Kumar Vs State of Punjab and Anr. — Cheque Dishonour | Punjab & Haryana HC (2014)

¶1

In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh

¶2

Criminal Misc. No.M-26422 of 2013 (O&M)

¶3

.....

¶4

Date of decision:5.12.2014

Rajesh Kumar

.....Petitioner

State of Punjab and another

¶9

.....Respondents

¶10

Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Inderjit Singh

¶11

.....

¶12

Present: Mr. Lovekesh Gupta, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶13

Mr. Varun Sharma, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab for the respondent-State.

¶14

None for the complainant-respondent No.2.

¶15

Inderjit Singh, J.

¶16

This petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. praying for quashing of FIR No.178 dated 26.11.2008 (Annexure-P.1) registered for the offences under Sections 406 and 420 IPC at Police Station Division No.5, Jalandhar, District Jalandhar and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom in view of the compromise dated 1.9.2012 (Annexure-P.2).

¶17

The FIR has been registered on the statement of complainantKanwaljit Singh on the allegations that petitioner-Rajesh Kumar, Travel Agent has embezzled `2,50,000/- along with his passport under the garb of sending him abroad and for giving threats with dire consequences when

¶18

HARPAL SINGH PARMAR 2014.12.11 15:45 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

¶19

Cr. Misc. No.M-26422 of 2013 (O&M) [2]

¶20

the complainant asked for return of passport and money. The petitioner has defrauded the complainant for sending him abroad, but in spite of receiving `2,50,000/- from the complainant, neither he sent him abroad nor he is returning his money and passport. When the complainant asked for his money and passport, he started giving threats to him and in this manner the petitioner has cheated the complainant. Now with the intervention of the respectable persons, the matter has been compromised between the petitioner and respondent No.2/complainant and they are willing to live peacefully and bury the hatchet. Compromise and receipt dated 1.9.2012 have been annexed with this petition.

¶21

Keeping in view the fact that the parties have entered into a compromise, they were directed to appear before learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jalandhar for getting their statements recorded in support of the compromise. After doing the needful, learned Chief Judicial Magistrate has sent report dated 11.11.2014 submitting that the compromise arrived at between the parties with their free will and without any threat or coercion from any one and the same is genuine one. Complainant-Kanwaljit Singh has stated that he has arrived at compromise with Rajesh Kumar voluntarily, without any pressure from any side and he has no objection if the FIR is quashed.

¶22

Learned Assistant Advocate General, Punjab, on instructions from the Investigating Officer admits the factum of compromise and 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

¶23

HARPAL SINGH PARMAR 2014.12.11 15:45 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

¶24

Cr. Misc. No.M-26422 of 2013 (O&M) [3]

¶25

down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court.

¶26

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Assistant Advocate General, Punjab and have gone through the record.

¶27

In a decision, based on compromise, none of the parties is a loser. Rather, 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.

¶28

The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and another, 2012 (4) RCR (Cr.) 543, has held that the inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. can be exercised to quash the proceedings in respect of criminal cases 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 personnel in nature and the parties have resolved their entire dispute even though they are not compoundable. Therefore, keeping in view the fact that the matter has been amicably settled and the law laid down in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and another (supra), this petition is allowed and FIR No.178 dated 26.11.2008 (Annexure-P.1) registered for the offences under Sections 406 and 420 IPC at Police Station Division No.5,

¶29

HARPAL SINGH PARMAR 2014.12.11 15:45 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

¶30

Cr. Misc. No.M-26422 of 2013 (O&M) [4]

¶31

Jalandhar, District Jalandhar and all subsequent proceedings arising out of

¶32

the same are hereby quashed.

¶33

December 5, 2014.

¶34

(Inderjit Singh) Judge

¶35

hsp

¶36

HARPAL SINGH PARMAR 2014.12.11 15:45 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

Rajesh Kumar v. State of Punjab and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajesh Kumar v. State of Punjab and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Balwan Singh Vs State of Haryana & Ors.

Subeg Singh Vs State of Punjab

Sandhuri Lal Mittal Vs State of Punjab & Anr.

Khalil Vs Jaituni and Anr.

Jasvir Singh Vs State of Punjab & Ors.

Paras Nath Singh Vs State of Haryana and Anr.