In Brief
A veterinary doctor working in a state animal husbandry department was accused of withdrawing salary while on unauthorized foreign trips and by submitting false medical certificates. An FIR was registered based on an RTI-based complaint. The accused petitioned for its quashing, and the High Court allowed the petition because the complainant and accused had agreed to settle. The Supreme Court reversed this, holding that such fraud against the State cannot be compromised between private individuals. The complainant lacked standing to settle a matter affecting the State as employer, and the High Court improperly ignored the State's opposing submissions. The appeal was allowed and the High Court's order set aside.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.