SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2007 Supreme(Bom) 190

(DELHI HIGH COURT)
SHIVNARAYAN DHINGRA, J.
Jitender Rana & Ors. Appellant
versus
State (NCT of Delhi) & Ors. Respondent
Crl. M.C. No.465 of 2007
Decided on :13th February, 2007.

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared
PRADEEP RANA, MANISH MALIK, AJAY MALIK and RAHUL, for Petitioners.
AJAY and Ms. RICHA KAPOOR, for Respondent No.2.

In cases where the substantive offence itself is compoundable, related sections such as Section 120-B or Section 34 of IPC shall also be compoundable.

Headnote:

Section 120-B of IPC - Criminal Conspiracy and Compoundable Offences - The court held that when the offence of cheating itself is compoundable, Section 120-B of IPC read with Section 420 of IPC becomes compoundable. The court clarified that in cases where the substantive offence itself is compoundable, Section 120-B read with it or Section 34 of IPC read with it shall also be compoundable.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioners sought quashing of FIR under Sections 419, 420, and 120-B of IPC, as the parties had entered into a compromise.

Finding of the Court:

The Court found that the offences were compoundable and that the Court of Metropolitan Magistrate had the power to allow the application for compounding of the offences.

Issues: The issue was whether Section 120-B of IPC, which pertains to criminal conspiracy, could be compounded when the substantive offence of cheating was compoundable.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that in cases where the substantive offence itself is compoundable, related sections such as Section 120-B or Section 34 of IPC shall also be compoundable.

Final Decision: The petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. was disposed of with directions for the parties to make an appropriate application before the Metropolitan Magistrate.

JUDGMENT:-

This is a petition under Section 482, Cr.P.C. for quashing of FIR No.244/99 under Sections 419, 420, l20-B, IPC, P.S. Narela, Delhi.

2. Both the offences are compoundable and the parties have entered into a compromise. Petitioners have approached this Court for quashing of FIR. Learned counsel for the petitioners state that though he intended to make an application before the Court of Metropolitan Magistrate for compounding of offences, however, the Court of Metropolitan Magistrate opined that since Section 120-B of IPC was also foisted on accused and 120-B of IPC was not mentioned in the list of compoundable offences, therefore, he may not be able to pass an order compounding offence. No order has been passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate rejecting the application for compounding of the offences.

3. Section 120-B of IPC is criminal conspiracy to commit an offence. Here in this case the allegations are of a criminal conspiracy to commit offence of cheating. When offence of cheating itself is compoundable, Section 120-B of IPC read with Section 420 of IPC becomes compoundable and the Court of Metropolitan Magistrate has power to allow the application for compounding of the offence of Sections 419,420 read with Section 120-B of IPC. In all such cases where substantive offence itself is compoundable, Section l20-B read with it or Section 34 of IPC read with it, shall be compoundable.

4. Parties are directed to make an appropriate application before Metropolitan Magistrate.

5. This petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. is disposed of with these directions. Dasti.

Order accordingly.



Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top