Sumit vs State of Haryana and Another

Inderjit Singh, J.—Sumit-petitioner has filed this petition u/s 482 Cr.P.C. praying for quashing of FIR No. 229 dated 5.8.2012 (Annexure-P. 1) registered for the offences under Sections 457 and 380 IPC at Police Station Beri, District Jhajjar and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom in view of the compromise (Annexure-P. 2).

The FIR has been registered on the statement of complainant-Mahesh alleging that the complainant woke-up as he heard some sound as the door of the house was open. He saw that Sumit was running away after coming out of their room. The complainant followed him, but could not catch him. He jumped by running from the top of the roof. After coming back inside, he saw his almirah and found that his purse, passport, copy of driving licence and Rs. 4,000/- were not there. As both the parties are residents of same area and are neighbour, therefore, with the intervention of the respectables of the society, the matter has been compromised between them.

Keeping in view the fact that the parties have entered into a compromise, they were directed to appear before learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jhajjar for getting their statements recorded in support of the compromise. After doing the needful, learned Chief Judicial Magistrate has sent his report dated 20.5.2014 submitting that the compromise arrived at between the parties is without any pressure or coercion from any one and the same is genuine one. Complainant-Mahesh has stated that compromise has been effected, which is without any pressure, coercion or consideration and he has no objection if the above said FIR is quashed.

Learned Assistant Advocate General, Haryana, on instructions from the Investigating Officer and learned counsel for complainant-respondent No. 2 admit the factum of compromise and submit that in case the parties have indeed settled their dispute, the State would have no objection to the quashing of the FIR in view of the law laid down by the Hon''ble Supreme Court.

I have gone through the record and have heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Assistant Advocate General, Haryana and learned counsel for complainant-respondent No. 2.

In a decision, based on compromise, none of the parties is a loser. Rather, compromise not only brings peace and harmony between the parties to a dispute, but also restores tranquility in the society. After considering the nature of offences allegedly committed and the fact that both the parties have amicably settled their dispute, continuance of criminal prosecution would be an exercise in futility, as the chances of ultimate conviction are bleak.

The Hon''ble Supreme Court in Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab and Another, , has held that the inherent jurisdiction of this Court u/s 482 Cr.P.C. can be exercised to quash the proceedings in respect of criminal cases arising from commercial, financial, mercantile, civil, partnership or such like transactions or the offences arising out of matrimony relating to dowry etc. or the family disputes where the wrong is basically private or personnel in nature and the parties have resolved their entire dispute even though they are not compoundable. Therefore, keeping in view the fact that the matter has been amicably settled and the law laid down in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and another (supra), this petition is allowed and FIR No. 229 dated 5.8.2012 (Annexure-P. 1) registered for the offences under Sections 457 and 380 IPC at Police Station Beri, District Jhajjar and all subsequent proceedings arising out of the same are hereby quashed.