The central legal point established in the judgment is that crimes with a societal impact, such as those under Sections 354-D, 506 IPC, and 66(c), 67 IT Act, should not be quashed based on compromise, as it would undermine the justice system and set a dangerous precedent.

JUDGMENT :

Manjari Nehru Kaul, J.

1. Prayer in the instant petition filed under Section 482 Cr.PC is for quashing the FIR No.28 dated 08.05.2021 for the offence under Sections 354-D and 506 IPC and Sections 66(c) and 67 of Information Technology (Amendment) Act, 2008 registered at Police Station Cyber City, Gurugram and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise dated 09.06.2021 (Annexure P-2).

2. It has been urged by learned counsel for the petitioner that in the wake of unconditional written apology by way of a duly sworn in affidavit dated 07.06.2021 (Annexure P-3) tendered by the petitioner with respect to the crime in question, followed by its acceptance by respondent No.2-complainant vide Annexure P-4 dated 22.06.2021, no useful purpose would be served by the continuation of the criminal proceedings against the petitioner. It has further been pleaded that petitioner and respondent No.2, are the affected parties, hence, in the wake of compromise dated 09.06.2021 (Annexure P-2) effected between them, no prejudice would be caused to anyone in case FIR in question is quashed.

3. Heard and perused the material available on record.

4. The inherent powers vested in this Court under Section 482 Cr.PC are undoubtedly extensive but they have to be exercised sparingly and with a great deal of caution. Courts draw the power of compounding offences from Section 320 Cr.PC, which enumerates the category of offences that can be compounded. Section 320(9) Cr.PC categorically and explicitly provides that “No offence shall be compounded except as provided by this Section.” Hence, the aforementioned statutory mandate should not be allowed to be breached and diluted except of course in cases having an overwhelming civil character arising out of commercial transactions, matrimonial or family disputes where the parties have amicably resolved their disputes amongst themselves as has been held by the Supreme Court in State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Laxmi Narayan and others, 2019(2) RCR (Crl.) 255. While exercising its powers under Section 482 Cr.PC for quashing of a FIR on the basis of a compromise between the parties, this Court must not thus, overlook the fact that the offences were categorized as compoundable and non-compoundable by the legislature with a definite intent.

5. This Court is very much alive to the fact that FIR registered for offences under Sections 354, 354-A, 354-C and 354-D IPC are being quashed on the basis of compromise by this Court in exercise of its inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.PC. However, a distinction would have to be drawn between those cases and the case in hand. It would be thus, apposite to reproduce the contents of the FIR as well as the compromise deed dated 09.06.2021 (Annexure P-2) effected between the petitioner and the complainant, which are as under:

First Information Report

“May 8th, 2021, To the SHO, Cyber Crime Cell, Gurgaon sub: complaint against Nitin Dubey for stalking, sending abusive material, threatening to throw acid and murder my daughter and family, threatening to upload morphed obscene pictures on the internet. Dear Sir, this is to inform you that a person named Nitin Dubey has been haassing my daughter over email and sending her abusive, pornographic material, impersonating her by creating similar email id's and threatening to throw acid, and is threatening to murder her and the family. I feel threatened for the life and safety of my daughter and my family. We request you to provide my daughter and my family police protection and take immediate and strict action against Nitin Dubey by filing FIR under relevant sections of IPC, IT Act, Crime against women and for impersonation. I am enclosing an official complaint with all the relevant documents for your record including some recent emails, his photograph and some other abusive/obscene material that he has sent through multiple email Ids.”

Compromise Deed

Nitin Dubey, aged 37 years s/o Sh. Mohan Dubey r/o House No.