The High Court may quash criminal proceedings if the parties have settled their dispute, and continuation would serve no useful purpose, particularly in cases with a civil flavor.

ORDER :

Mr. Yogendra Kumar Purohit, J. - Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.

2. This criminal misc. petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been preferred by the petitioners for quashing of FIR No. 124/2020 registered at Police Station Pratap Nagar District Bhilwara for the offences under Sections 420, 406, 467, 468, 471 IPC and all the consequential criminal proceedings pursuant thereto.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioners and the complainant-respondent No.2 have already entered into compromise and settled the matter and on the basis of it, there is no possibility of conviction of the petitioners for the aforesaid offences. It is also argued that no useful purpose would be served by continuing the investigation/trial against the petitioners for the alleged offences because the same may derail the compromise arrived at between the parties. Learned counsel for the petitioners has also filed a Memorandum of Understanding/ Settlement executed between the parties stating therein that the complainant has no objection for quashing the aforesaid FIR.

4. Learned counsel for the respondent No.2 has admitted that the parties have already entered into compromise and resolved their dispute amicably and the respondent No.2 does not want to press the charges levelled in the FIR against the petitioners as aforesaid and complainant has no objection for quashing the FIR.

5. Learned Public Prosecutor has placed on record the factual report dated 18.12.2023 and opposed the prayer for quashing of the FIR.

6. The Hon'ble Apex Court while answering a reference in the case of Gian Singh v. State of Punjab & Anr. reported in JT 2012 (9) SC 426 has held as below:-

"57. The position that emerges from the above discussion can be summarised 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 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