TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>High Court quashes FIR based on compromise, lack of evidence</h1> <h3>G. Udayan Dravid And Ors. Versus State And Ors.</h3> G. Udayan Dravid And Ors. Versus State And Ors. - TMI Issues Involved:1. Quashing of FIR No. 62/2004 u/s 406/120B IPC on the grounds of compromise/settlement.2. Quashing of FIR on merits.3. Jurisdiction of High Court u/s 482 CrPC to quash non-compoundable offences.Summary:1. Quashing of FIR on Grounds of Compromise/Settlement:The petitioners sought quashing of FIR No. 62/2004 u/s 406/120B IPC registered at police station Kapashera, citing a compromise/settlement with the complainant bank (ICICI Bank Ltd). The complainant bank confirmed no grievance remained, and its counsel did not oppose the quashing of the FIR.2. Quashing of FIR on Merits:The State opposed the quashing, arguing that the charge-sheet u/s 406/120B IPC had been filed and the offence was non-compoundable as per Section 320 of the Code. The petitioners' counsel contended that no offence u/s 406 IPC was made out, as hypothecation does not involve entrustment, referencing the Supreme Court decision in Indian Oil Corporation v. NEPC India Ltd. and Ors. The counsel argued that at best, it could be a case of cheating u/s 415 IPC, punishable u/s 420 IPC, which is compoundable.3. Jurisdiction of High Court u/s 482 CrPC to Quash Non-Compoundable Offences:The petitioners' counsel cited several decisions supporting the High Court's power to quash criminal proceedings even for non-compoundable offences if a settlement is reached. The State's counsel referenced decisions like Union Carbide v. Union of India and State of Madhya Pradesh v. Awadh Kishore Gupta and Ors., arguing against quashing non-compoundable offences. However, the court noted that these decisions did not preclude the High Court's inherent power u/s 482 CrPC to quash such proceedings.Conclusion:The court recognized its inherent power u/s 482 CrPC to quash criminal proceedings even for non-compoundable offences, emphasizing the need for caution in exercising this power. Given the settlement between the parties and the lack of evidence supporting an offence u/s 406 IPC, the court quashed the FIR and all proceedings pursuant thereto.
TaxTMI 