The High Court can quash FIRs partially based on settlement, allowing further proceedings against co-accused.

JUDGMENT

The petitioner is the accused No.2 in Ext.P4 FIR. The respondent No.4 is the defacto complainant. Altogether there are three accused. The offences alleged are punishable under Sections

408, 420, 465, 468, 477A and 380 read with 34 of the IPC . 2. The accused Nos. 1 to 3 were the employees of a business concern run by the respondent No.4 under the name and style Shenoy Traders. The prosecution allegation is that, while they were working as field executives from 2000 to 2014, they misappropriated ₹40,00,000/- by forging documents.

3. Originally there were two petitioners, accused Nos. 2 and 3. The petitioner No.1 was the accused No.2 and the petitioner No.2 was the accused No.3. The above case was referred to mediation. In mediation, the dispute between the petitioner No.1 and the respondent No.4 was settled. Hence, the petitioner No.2 is deleted from the party array. The mediation agreement has been placed before me. It would show that the entire dispute between the petitioner(accused No.2) and the respondent No.4 has been settled amicably. As part of settlement, a sum of ₹1,10,000/- was paid by the petitioner to the respondent No.4. The respondent No.4 has sworn in an affidavit in which it is stated that in view of the settlement, he has no objection in quashing the FIR as against the petitioner.

4. The Supreme Court inLovely Salhotra v. State NCT of Delhi ( 2017 KHC 3564 ) has held that the FIR can be quashed in part. This Court also inSajeev and Another v. State of Kerala and Another [ 2022 (3) KHC 69 ] held that it is permissible to quash FIR in part depending on the facts and circumstances of each case. Considering the facts and circumstances, I am of the view that the prayer to quash FIR against the petitioner alone on the ground of settlement can be allowed.

5. Accordingly, all further proceedings against the petitioner pursuant to Ext.P4 FIR is hereby quashed, invoking the power vested with this Court under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. It is made clear that the proceedings against the remaining accused can continue.

The writ petition is disposed of as above.