The main legal point established in the judgment is that the High Court has inherent powers to prevent an abuse of the process of any court or to secure the ends of justice, especially in cases where the compromise between the parties justifies the quashing of criminal proceedings.

JUDGMENT :

Anoop Chitkara J.

The petitioners, who have been arraigned as accused in the above captioned FIR, have come up before this Court under Section 482 CrPC to quash the FIR and all consequential proceedings based on the compromise with the victims.

2. The gist of the allegations against the petitioner(s) is that on 28.06.2019, the complainant (respondent No.2) made a written complaint to SHO, Kherki Daula, District Gurugram in the following terms:-

He stated that he is working at Kherki Toll Plaza and on 28.06.2019 when he asked the driver of one Alto Car to pay the fee then he showed RC certificate in which car was registered in Village Manesar whose toll is exempted. Since the complainant and his officials were already suspecting that people were making false RCs to save toll tax, as such, they called him to show original certificate. On this, the Alto car driver along with owner, started hurling abuses and gave beatings on head by picking stones from the road.

3. During the pendency of the petition, the accused and the injured have compromised the matter, and its copy is annexed with this petition as Annexure P-2. After that, the petitioners have come up before this Court to quash the FIR, and in the quashing petition, the injured have been impleaded as respondent(s).

4. On the prayer of the parties, the Court had permitted the parties to appear before the concerned Court to record their statements. As per the concerned Sessions Court's report, the victim(s), without any threat, consented to the quashing of FIR and consequent proceedings.

ANALYSIS & REASONING:

5. As per the report received from JMIC, Gurugram, statements of the parties have been recorded and the compromise effected between them is genuine and out of their free will without any pressure.

6. The following aspects would be relevant to conclude this petition: -

a) The accused and the private respondent(s) have amicably settled the matter between them in terms of the compromise deed and the statements recorded before the concerned Court;

b) A perusal of the documents reveal that the settlement has not been secured through coercion, threats, social boycotts, bribes, or other dubious means;

c) The victim has willingly consented to the nullification of criminal proceedings;

d) There is no objection from the private respondents in case present FIR and consequent proceedings are quashed;

e) In the given facts, the occurrence does not affect public peace or tranquillity, moral turpitude or harm the social and moral fabric of the society or involve matters concerning public policy;

f) The rejection of compromise may also lead to ill will. The pendency of trial affects career and happiness;

g) There is nothing on the record to prima facie consider the accused as an unscrupulous, habitual, or professional offender;

h) The purpose of criminal jurisprudence is reformatory in nature and to work to bring peace to family and society;

i) The ends of justice would justify the exercise of the inherent power by quashing the FIR and the consequent proceedings.

7. In the present case, although offence under section 420 IPC is compoundable with the permission of the Court but the offencesunder Ss 467, 468, and 471 IPC are not compoundable under Section 320 CrPC. However, in the facts and circumstances peculiar to this case, the prosecution qua the non-compoundable offences can be closed by quashing the FIR and consequent proceedings.

8. In Gold Quest International Private Limited v. State of Tamil Nadu, (2014) 15 SCC 235, Hon’ble Supreme Court holds,

[3]. Brief facts of the case are that the appellant is an International Numismatic Company which has operations in over sixty countries. It is ple