The court can exercise its inherent power under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. to quash criminal proceedings for non-compoundable offences having overwhelmingly civil character, particularly those arising out of commercial transactions, when the parties have resolved the entire dispute amongst themselves.

JUDGMENT :

Heard Mr. K. Agarwal, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Ms. P. Neog, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. K. Bhattacharya, learned counsel for the private respondent and Mr. A. K. Das, learned counsel representing the State of Assam.

2. The present revision petition under Section 397/401/482 of Cr.P.C. is filed assailing the judgment and order dated 31.10.2011 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kamrup in Crl. Appeal No. 53/2010 and Cr the Criminal Revision No. 77/2010 confirming and upholding the judgment and order dated 19.06.2010 passed by the learned Magistrate 1st Class, Guwahati in C.R. Case No. 4594/2006, whereby the present petitioner was convicted for offences under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and directed to pay a sum of Rs. 5,00,000/-(five Lakhs) being the cheque amount along with the compensation of another Rs. 1,00,000/-(one lakh) under Section 357 of the Cr.P.C. in default to undergo S.I. for one year.

3. It is submitted that during the pendency of this proceeding, both the claimant and the respondent entered into an agreement of compromise on 03.05.2017. A copy of such agreement is produced by Mr. K. Agarwal, learned Senior Counsel and Mr. K Bhattacharya, learned counsel has also submitted that this is the agreement on the basis of which the parties had mutually settled the dispute and this revision petition may be disposed of and the petitioner may be acquitted on the basis of such compromise deed.

4. The relevant portion of the compromise deed is quoted herein below:-

“2) That the aforesaid payment of 4 lakhs will be made in instalments of Rs. 1 lakh on every alternative months in cash and it has been agreed that the First Party will made the payment of 1st instalment of Rs. 2 lakh on 29.04.2017, the 2nd instalment on 30.06.2017, 3rd instalment on 29.08.2017.

2A) That on execution of this agreement and on payment of the 1st instalment of Rs. 1 lakh, both the parties will file a joint petition in Criminal Revision Petition No. 86/2012, Money Execution Case No. 04/2015 and C.R.P. No. 454/2016 along with a copy of this agreement appraising the Hon’ble Court about the settlement arrived at by both the parties and to make a prayer to keep in abeyance the proceedings of the three case till the final payment is made.

3) That on completion of the payment of Rs. 4 lakhs by the First Party to the Second Party, both the parties will file a joint petition-

(i) In Criminal Revision Petition No. 86/2012 with a prayer to set aside the Judgment and Order dated 19.06.2010 and Judgment and Order dated 31.10.2011 and disposed off the case being compromised,

(ii) In C.R.P. No. 454/2016 with a prayer to direct the Execution Court to accept the compromise and order satisfaction of the decree passed in the Money Suit No. 26/2007, and

(iii) In the Money Execution Case No. 04/2015 with a prayer to record the satisfaction of the decree on payment of the aforesaid amount of Rs. 4 lakhs”.

5. It is also submitted by Mr. Bhattacharya, learned counsel that pursuant to the compromise settlement, all payment has been made and no liability is due as on date. In view of the aforesaid, both the learned counsel has prayed that this revision petition may be closed on the basis of settlement arrived at by both the parties.

6. In the aforesaid backdrop, this Court is now to decide whether this is a fit case where this Court can exercise its inherent power under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. to quash the judgment and order dated 31.10.2011 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kamrup in Crl. Appeal No. 53/2010 and the Criminal Revision No. 77/2010 confirming and upholding the judgment and order dated 19.06.2010 passed by the learned Magistrate 1st Class, Guwahati in C.R. Case No. 4594/2006.

7. It is by now settled that a High Court in exercise of its power under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. can very well quash a criminal proceeding or a criminal complaint under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., but while doing s