R S ARORA Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a petition for quashing of the FIR No .70/1990 under Sections 452/506/392/34 Indian Penal Code lodged by one Mr.Sanjay Bhandari, respondent No.2 at Police Station - Malviya Nagar, New Delhi pending in the Court of Shri O.P.Saini, Metropolitan Magistrate, Delhi.

(2.) Mr. S.K. Mittal, learned counsel for the petitioner, has stated that as a matter of fact Mr.Sanjay Bhandari, respondent No.2 was a sub-tenant and civil litigation was pending between the petitioner and respondent No.2, the FIR was lodged as there was dispute inter se between the parties. It. has also been argued before me that the possession of the premises in question has been handed over by the said respondent No.2 and he has made an application in the Civil Court that he does not want to press the complaint which he has filed against the petitioner and others. Even in this Court on 22.2.1993 a statement to this effect has been recorded that respondent No.2 does not want to press the matter. In support of his contentions Mr. Mittal has cited 1991(45) DLT 57, 3992 (2) CCR 831, AIR 1988 SC 2111. Mr.Mittal has stated that the petitioner is a Government employee and he is working as Superintending Engineer, Municipal Corporation of Delhi and it will be in the interest of justice if the proceedings pending in the Court of Metropolitan Magistrate are quashed.

(3.) On the other hand, Ms.Mukta Gupta, learned counsel for the petitioner, has vehemently argued that this Court while exercising its inherent powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short "Cr.P.C.") has no jurisdiction to quash the proceedings in relation to offences which are non-compoundable as there is a specific bar provided under Section 320 of the Criminal Procedure Code . Ms.Gupta in support of her arguments has cited 1987 (2) JT SC 361, 1991 Cr.L.J. 2758, 1994 Cr.L.J. 2928.