The inherent power of the High Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure can be used to quash criminal proceedings based on a compromise, even for non-compoundable offences, if it serves the ends of justice and the compromise is voluntary and genuine.

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 the complainant (respondent No.2 herein) gave a written complaint to SSP, Mohali in the following terms:-

He alleged that on 28.10.2020, he read an advertisement about marital prospect in one newspaper, wherein a mobile number was mentioned and when he called on that number, the person claimed that his nieces reside in Canada and for their marriage he has given prospect in India. After further communication, the person who had advertised, claimed that the girls have liked his sons for marriage proposals. Later on he received a call that his son has been kidnapped and ransom has been demanded and under that pretext they took Rs.1,50,000/- from him. They kept on defrauding him on one pretext on the other. When he realized that he has been cheated then he filed a complaint which lead to the registration of the present FIR. Later on, during the investigation, the police found the involvement of the petitioners herein.

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 in the present petition, 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 report of JMIC, Kharar, statements of the parties have been recorded and the compromise effected between them is voluntary and genuine. It is also submitted in the report that as per statement of the complainant, he has no objection if the present FIR along with all consequential proceedings, is quashed.

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, the offence under section 120-B of Indian Penal Code, 1860, (IPC) is not compoundable under Section 320 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC). However, in the facts and circumstances peculiar to this case, the prosecution qua the non-compoundable offences can be closed