SHIV RAJ SHARMA Vs. STATE OF RAJ.
LAWS(RAJ)-2013-11-56
HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN
Decided on November 14,2013

SHIV RAJ SHARMA Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF RAJ. Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) THIS Misc. petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the FIR no.36/2012 registered at Police Station Shyam Nagar Jaipur for offence under sections 420,406 and 120 -B IPC and sections 3 and 5 of Prize Chits and Money Circulation Scheme (Banning) Act,1978.
(2.) THE short facts of case narrated in the petition are that an FIR no.36/2012 came to be registerd at Police Station Shyam Nagar Jaipur for offence under sections 420,406 and 120 -B IPC and sections 3 and 5 of Prize Chits and Money Circulation Scheme (Banning) Act,1978. During investigation complainant realised that FIR has been lodged under the misunderstanding and he submitted affidavit to the investigation officer. After lodging of the FIR with the efforts of well -wishers both the parties arrived to an amicable settlement. The dispute which has been narrated in the FIR arises out of commercial transaction and it can be brought to an end through composition of the offence, hence the prayer of the petitioner is that FIR be quashed. The learned counsel for the respondents also agreeable to the same situation and both the parties have filed an agreement deed which was verified by the Deputy Registrar (Judl.).
(3.) THE only contention of the present petitioner is that the matter has been compromised between the parties and hence the FIR should be quashed and reliance has been placed on Jagdish Chanana and Ors vs State Of Haryana and Anr., JT 2008 (4) SC 511 wherein it was held: ''The fact that a compromise has indeed been recorded is admitted by all sides and in terms of the compromise the disputes which are purely personal in nature and arise out of commercial transactions, have been settled in terms of the compromise with one of the terms of the compromise being that proceedings pending in court may be withdrawn or compromised or quashed, as the case may be. In the light of the compromise, it is unlikely that the prosecution will succeed in the matter. We also see that the dispute is a purely personal one and no public policy is involved in the transactions that had been entered into between the parties. To continue with the proceedings, therefore, would be a futile exercise. '' ;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.