The main legal point established in the judgment is that the power to quash criminal proceedings can be exercised when the dispute has been settled between the parties, the amount in question has been received, and no societal interest is involved, as guided by the judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court.

JUDGMENT :

1. Heard Mr. Nilesh Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mrs. Neha Pandey, learned counsel for the State and Mr. Kumar Amit, learned counsel for the No. 2.

2. This petition has been filed for quashing of entire criminal proceeding in connection with Dhansar P.S. Case No. 0148 of 2021 registered for the offences under sections 406, 420, 467, 468, 469, 471, 504, 506, 34 of the Indian Penal Code, pending in the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dhanbad.

3. The First Information was lodged alleging therein that the petitioner being official of M/s Prakash Industries Limited along with other officials/co-accused approached the complainant at his office in a pre-planned manner to cheat the complainant. It is alleged that the petitioner and other officials allured the complainant’s Firm Lucky Coke Industries to supply the coal at the factory at Champa, Jangir, Chattisgarh and further committed to make the payment within 30 days from the date of delivery but the complainant refused. But as there were past dues, hence, the petitioner and other officials promised to clear the past dues as soon as possible and further assured that after issuing purchase orders the payment shall be made within 30 days. It is further alleged that after taking the complainant into confidence 3 purchase orders in the month of August, September and October were issued and the coal worth Rs. 2,21,85,307/- was got supplied as per the purchase order but no payment was made as per the commitment and as per the account the complainant has been cheated of Rs. 2,06,22,195/- and on asking for the payment the complainant has been threatened of dire consequences.

4. Mr. Nilesh Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the dispute relates to certain commercial transaction and for non payment of Rs. 2,06,22,195/- for which the instant case has been filed. He further submits that the petitioner has paid the amount in question to the O.P. No. 2 as agreed between the parties. He submits that the dispute has been amicably settled between the parties and the terms and conditions have been brought on record by way of supplementary affidavit filed by the petitioner. He submits that MoU has been annexed as Annexure-A to the supplementary affidavit.

5. Mr. Kumar Amit, learned counsel appearing for the O.P. No. 2 submits that the dispute between the parties has been settled and the amount in question has been received by the O.P. No. 2 as agreed between the parties. He submits that the O.P. No. 2 is not willing to proceed in the matter.

6. Learned counsel for the State fairly submits as the matter has been compromised, the Court may pass appropriate order.

7. In the case of Narinder Singh & Ors. Versus State of Punjab & Anr., reported in (2014) 6 SCC 466, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that in those cases which are not compoundable and there is no chance of conviction and also there is no societal interest, where the parties have settled the matter between themselves, the power is to be exercised. In Paragraphs-27 and 28, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held as follows:-

“27. At this juncture, we would like also to add that the timing of settlement would also play a crucial role. If the settlement is arrived at immediately after the alleged commission of offence when the matter is still under investigation, the High Court may be somewhat liberal in accepting the settlement and quashing the proceedings/investigation. Of course, it would be after looking into the attendant circumstances as narrated in the previous para. Likewise, when challan is submitted but the charge has not been framed, the High Court may exercise its discretionary jurisdiction. However, at this stage, as mentioned above, since the report of the I.O. under Section 173, Cr.P.C. is also placed before the Court it would become the bounding duty of the Court to go into the said report and the evidence collected, particularly the medical evidence relating to injury