AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Baldev Singh, J.—Inderjeet Singh Uppal (Petitioner) has filed this petition u/s 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short `the Code'') for quashing First Information Report No. 95 dated March 17, 2004, registered under Sections 420/467/468/471/120-B of the Indian Penal Code at Police Station Sector 36, Chandigarh, and subsequent proceedings taken thereon.
Amarjit Kaur (Respondent No. 2-complainant) had lodged this First Information Report. She has filed her affidavit dated May 27, 2004 (Annexure P-2) stating therein that the mis-understanding and mis-construance of the situation has been settled and set to rest, no such issue or imbroglio between the parties sustains in any respect whatsoever. Further that the First Information Report be quashed as she has effected compromise.
Continuance of proceedings will be an exercise in futility as the parties have amicably settled the dispute and have compromised the matter. The offences under Sections 420/467/468/471/120-B of the Indian Penal Code are not compoundable. However, in exercise of inherent powers u/s 482 of the Code, proceedings in First Information Report or complaint can be quashed and Section 320 of the Code does not limit or affect the powers u/s 482 of the Code. Cases of Mahesh Chand v. State of Rajasthan, 1990(3) RCR 332 (SC), Mohinder Singh Khosla v. State of Union Territory of Chandigarh, 1996 (1) RCR 120 and Ram Lal v. State of J & K, 2000(1) RCR(Crl.) 92 (SC): 1999 SCC (Criminal) 123, can be referred on thus proposition.
Accordingly, this petition is allowed and First Information Report No. 95 dated March 17, 2004, registered under Sections 420/467/468/471/120-B of the Indian Penal Code at Police Station Sector 36, Chandigarh, is ordered to be quashed. All the subsequent proceedings arising from this First Information Report are set aside.
Petition allowed.