Punjab-Haryana High Court
Smt. Nisha Thakur vs State Of Punjab & Another on 26 April, 2013
Author: L. N. Mittal
Bench: L. N. Mittal
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CRL. MISC. No.M-17964 OF 2012
DATE OF DECISION : 26th APRIL, 2013
Smt. Nisha Thakur
.... Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab & another
.... Respondents
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE L. N. MITTAL
****
Present : Ms. Supriya Arora, Advocate for
Mr. Rajiv Kataria, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Mikhail Kad, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab for
respondent No.1.
Respondent No.2-complainant in person.
****
L. N. MITTAL, J. (ORAL)
Accused- Nisha Thakur has filed this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short, Cr.P.C.) for quashing FIR No.100 dated 14.09.2011 (Annexure P-1) registered under Sections 420 and 120-B IPC at Police Station Cantt. Ferozepur, in view of compromise effected with respondent No.2-complainant Daljeet Singh, who has furnished affidavit dated 30.07.2012 Annexure A-1 regarding compromise with the petitioner.
Respondent No.2 has appeared in person. He has been identified by SI Puran Chand, who has come to assist the State counsel. CRL. MISC. No.M-17964 OF 2012 -2- I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned State counsel and respondent No.2 in person.
Respondent No.2-complainant stated that he has effected compromise with the petitioner and has furnished affidavit Annexure A-1 regarding said compromise and, therefore, he has no objection if the impugned FIR is quashed.
In appropriate cases, FIR can be quashed by this Court on the basis of compromise by exercising inherent power under Section 482 Cr. P. C., even if the offences are not compoundable. It was so held by Full Bench of this Court in the case of Kulwinder Singh Vs. State of Punjab 2007 (3) Law Herald (Punjab & Haryana) 2225.
In the instant case, grievance of respondent No.2-complainant regarding money transaction with the petitioner has since been redressed and satisfied by the petitioner. The complainant has received back his money from the petitioner. Accordingly, it is a fit case in which the impugned FIR should be quashed qua the petitioner.
Resultantly, instant petition is allowed and impugned FIR Annexure P-1 is quashed along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom qua petitioner Nisha Thakur only.
26th April, 2013 (L. N. MITTAL)
'raj' JUDGE