JUDGMENT 1. - Ms. Vandana Bhansali, learned Counsel for the petitioners seeks to withdraw the power filed on behalf of the petitioners. 2. The instant misc. petition has been filed by the petitioners seeking quashing of the F.I.R. No. 438/2011 registered at the Police Station Kotwali, District Bhilwara for the offences under Sections 406, 419 and 420 I.P.C. 3. Allegations in brief are: Mr. Shiv Prakash Choudhary and Mrs. Kamla Devi Choudhary, present in person requests that they will argue the matter themselves. He submits that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case. He contends that co-accused Himanshu Paliwal in connivance with the Bank Officer has prepared the fraudulent loan papers and has unnecessarily entangled the petitioners in this case. He submits that the Bank Officers have coerced the accused to clear the dues Bank without any justification under threat of facing retribution. 4. He further submits 'that the Bank Officers who accepted the loan application of Himanshu Paliwal have been given charge sheet by their department. He thus prays that the F.I.R. impugned should be quashed. 5. Mr. Jagdish Vyas, learned Counsel appearing for the complainant Bank submits that before receiving the amount, it was made clear to the accused that receipt of the amount shall not be considered to be a compromise by the Bank. He has filed the document dated 9.8.2012 whereupon the signatures of one Ravinder Choudhary (brother of Mr. Shiv Prakash Choudhary) are available. 6. Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the submissions advanced by Mr. Shiv Prakash Choudhary and submitted a factual report of the investigating Officer. 7. Heard Mr. Shiv Prakash Choudhary, Mr. Jagdish Vyas, learned Counsel for the Bank and Mr. A.R. Nikub, learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the impugned F.I.R., the Investigating Officer's factual report submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor, the letter dated 9.8.2012 placed by the learned Counsel appearing for the Bank and the material available on record. 8. As per the factual report, the accused Shiv Prakash Choudhary is a Chartered Accountant. As per the Investigating Officer's conclusion the petitioners connived with Himanshu Paliwal and received forged quotations and thereby fraudulently procured a loan from the complainant. The firms on behalf whereof the fraudulent quotations were filed in the Bank were submitted in the Bank were already having accounts in the name of Samta Jain and Kamla Choudhary. The payment of bankers cheque was received through these accounts. The firms on behalf whereof the fraudulent quotations were filed in the Bank were submitted in the Bank were already having accounts in the name of Samta Jain and Kamla Choudhary. The payment of bankers cheque was received through these accounts. 9. Accordingly the Investigating Officer has found offences under Sections 406, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B I.P.C. proved against the accused Shiv Prakash Choudhary, Himanshu Paliwal and the petitioners. Much stress has been laid on the fact that, the petitioners have cleared the dues of the Bank and despite that the Bank is not coming forward to file a compromise in this case. 10. The law in this regard is well settled by the decision rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of J.I.K. Industries & Ors. v. Amarlal V. Jumani & Anr., reported in AIR 2012. SC 1079 that a complainant cannot he forced to accept a compromise and in absence of the consent of the complainant, the proceedings cannot be quashed by the Court simply because the payment has been made to him. As the offences under Sections 467, 468, 471 and 120-B I.P.C. are not compoundable, therefore, this Court is of the opinion that it is not a fit case for exercising inherent powers for quashing the F.I.R. impugned in this case.Accordingly, the miscellaneous petition seeking quashing of the F.I.R. is rejected. The petitioners are at liberty to request the Bank officials to file an appropriate compounding application in the Court concerned in the event charge sheet is filed. The stay application is also rejected.Petition dismissed. *******