IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.47772 of 2007 PRABHAKAR TIWARI Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ANR ----------- 4/ 12/2/2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State as also learned counsel for O.P. No.2. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order of cognizance dated 13.2.2007 under Sections- 420 of I.P.C. and 138 of N.I. Act in Complaint Case No.2598/06 by the Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Vaishali at Hazipur. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the dispute is essentially civil in nature. The petitioner was willing to return the amount of the value of the dishonoured instrument. The allegations are that the petitioner took a loan from the O.P. No.2. When he failed to repay the loan, the petitioner offered to sell certain lands of his in lieu thereof towards adjustment of the loan amount and took further balance consideration money. Thereafter, the petitioner entered into an agreement with respect to the very same lands with another person and executed an agreement for sale. If that be the allegation, this Court finds it 2 difficult to accept the submission that the dispute was essentially civil in nature. The offences are compoundable. Section-420 of I.P.C. is compoundable with the leave of the Court as a matter of public policy. But, there can be no compounding unless the parties be willing. This Court is satisfied that the allegations constitute materials sufficient to go to trial. The application is rejected. If on basis of any subsequent developments an application for compounding is filed on behalf of the parties, the court below shall not be inhibited from consideration of the same in accordance with law merely for reason of the rejection of the present application. KC ( Navin Sinha, J.)