HC allows compromise in cognizable and non-compoundable offence

NT Correspondent

Bengaluru: Though the allegation against a person under the Indian Penal Code (IPC) was for a cognizable and non-compoundable offence, the High Court of Karnataka allowed the compromise arrived at between the parties and quashed the FIR filed against the accused.

Thribhuvan, a 25-year-old from Arasikere, Hassan had approached the HC with a petition which came up for hearing before Justice Hemant Chandangoudar. Pradeep, the Assistant Manager of ECom Express, had lodged a complaint against Thribhuvan.

It was alleged that Thribhuvan was the working supervisor of ECom Express, a courier company and “instead of delivering the parcel to the customers, misused the articles contained in the parcel, thus causing loss of Rs.3,48,274.”

Both parties were present before the High Court and filed an application for compounding the offence under Section 320(2) read under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC).

They stated that the dispute among themselves is amicably settled, and in terms of the settlement, the petitioner (Thribhuvan) has returned a sum of Rs.2,00,000 through RTGS to the Bank Account of respondent No.2 (Pradeep) towards the full and final claim of the respondent No.2 and respondent No.2 has no objection for quashing the criminal proceedings pending.

Thribhuvan was charged under Section 420 (Cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property) of the IPC.

This is a non-compoundable (where compromise is not allowed) offence as well as a cognizable offence (where police can arrest the accused and start an investigation without the court’s permission).

However, since the two parties had already settled their differences, the HC said that there was no use in continuing the prosecution.

“Though the offences alleged are cognizable and non-compoundable, however having regard to the fact that the parties have amicably settled the dispute among themselves, and the second respondent having no objection to quash the impugned FIR, it would be a futile exercise, if the petitioner is subjected to investigation, since the probability of police filing charge sheet is unlikely in view of the settlement,” the HC said.

Allowing the petition and quashing the file pending before the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC by the Arasikere Town Police Station, the HC said, “The continuation of the investigation against the petitioners will be an abuse of process of law.” (CrLP 10027/2023)