1. - By this criminal miscellaneous petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., a i prayer is made for quashing of criminal proceedings in case No. 353/2012 for offence under Section 3/4 Chit Fund and Money Circulation Scheme Prohibition Act, 1978 (for short "Act of 1978"). Further prayer is for compounding the offence.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that settlement has been arrived between the parties, thus proceedings may be quashed. It is, however, admitted that offence is not compoundable under Section 320 of Cr.RC. and in view of above, the Court passed an order on 24th April, 2014 for hearing of case for framing of the charges.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has referred judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of CBI, ACB, Mumbai v. Narendra Lal Jain & Ors. reported in 2014(1) WLC (SC) Criminal 572 . Therein, the case for offence under Section 5(1)(d), (2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 along with offence under Section 420 & 120B of IPC was settled between the parties. In view of aforesaid, dropping of criminal proceedings by this High Court was held to be proper. The Apex Court did not interfere in the order passed by the High Court in view of the settlement, which was on discharge of liabilities of the Bank.

4. I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel and perused the record.

5. It is a case where allegations against the petitioner was not only for the offence under Sections 420 & 120B along with 406 of IPC but 3/4 of the Act of 1978. I find that after registration of the case under Section 420, 120B & 406 of IPC, this Court passed an order on 04th April, 2014 for dropping of proceedings in view of the settlement. It was at the stage when investigation was pending and after the investigation, offence under Section 3/4 of the Act of 1978 was also found. An application to compound the offence was not accepted by the trial Court.

6. The question for my consideration is as to whether proceedings for an offence under Section 3/4 of the Act of 1978 can be dropped based on settlement between the parties. The judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of CBI, ACB, Mumbai (supra) has been referred.

7. The judgment supra was given after referring various judgments of the Hon'ble Apex Court on the issue. The judgment in the case of Gian Singh v. State of Punjab & Anr. reported in 2012(2) WLC (SC) Cri. 753 : 2012 (10)SCC 303 has also been considered therein. Relevant paras of the said judgment are quoted hereunder for ready reference :

"58. Where High Court quashes a criminal proceeding having regard to the fact that dispute between the offender and victim has been settled although affiances are not compoundable, it does so as in its opinion, continuation of criminal proceedings will be an exercise in futility and justice in the case demands that the dispute between the parties is put to an end and peace is restored; securing the ends of justice being the ultimate guiding factor. No doubt, crimes are acts which have harmful effect on the public and consist in wrong doing that seriously endangers and threatens well-being of society and it is not safe to leave the crime doer only because he and the victim have settled the dispute amicably or that the victim has been paid compensation, yet certain crimes have been made compoundable in law, with or without permission of the Court. In respect of serious offences like murder, rape dacoity, etc; or other offences of mental depravity under IPC or offences of moral turpitude under special statutes, like Prevention of Corruption Act or the offences committed by Public servants while working in that capacity, the settlement between offender and victim can have no legal sanction at all. However, certain offences which overwhelmingly and predominantly bear civil flavour having arisen out of civil, mercantile, commercial, financial, partnership or such like transactions or the offences arising out of matrimony, particularly relating to dowry, etc.