Mandeep Singh Chawla And ANR v. Union Territory, Chandigarh And ANR

CRM-M No. 28278-2019 --1--

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M No. 28278-2019 Reserved on 19.04. 2022 Pronounced on: July 14, 2022 Mandeep Singh Chawla and another ......Petitioners Vs.

Union Territory, Chandigarh and another ......Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA

Present:

Mr. Anurag Chopra, Advocate and Mr. Dhruv Sood, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Rajeev Anand, APP, UT, Chandigarh Mr. Gourav Goel, Advocate for respondent No.2. *** ANOOP CHITKARA J.

FIR No.

Dated Police Station Sections 22.03.2019 East, Sector 26, 420, 120-B IPC Chandigarh Aggrieved by the respondent - bank to accede to compromise of compoundable offences despite receiving the entire amount according to the settlement, the accused have come up before this Court under Section 482 CrPC for its quashing and of all consequential proceedings. The allegations in the complaint relevant to deciding this petition are that the petitioners defaulted in payment of the loan, which led to the registration of the FIR mentioned above. In the interregnum, the parties settled the loan accounts, and vide letter dated 30-03-2019, an acknowledgment to the said effect, was sent by the bank through its AGM to the petitioner's firm. However, the bank stated that the criminal complaint filed by the bank shall continue. Feeling aggrieved, the petitioners invoke the extraordinary jurisdiction of this court. Despite notice and its service, the respondent neither filed any reply nor asked for time to file the same.

The offence under section 420 IPC is compoundable, and the offence under section 120SONIA ARORA 2022.07.15 16:45 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CRM-M No. 28278-2019 --2-- B of IPC, when added with a compoundable offence, also becomes compoundable. A perusal of the communication as mentioned above, dated 30-03-2019, Annexure P-2 does not mention any reason because of which the criminal matter was not compromised despite receiving the money in terms of the settlement. Given above, in the facts and circumstances peculiar to this case, the continuation of criminal proceedings will amount to misuse of the process of law and have to be disrupted at this stage itself. Resultantly, the Court invokes the inherent jurisdiction under section 482 CrPC and quashes the FIR and all consequent proceedings. The bail bonds of the petitioners are accordingly discharged.

Petition allowed. All pending application(s), if any, stand closed. (ANOOP CHITKARA) JUDGE July 14, 2022 sonia arora Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes Whether reportable:

No.

SONIA ARORA 2022.07.15 16:45 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document