CRM-M No.42057 of 2023 (O&M) 1 2023:PHHC: 142287 298 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M No.42057 of 2023 (O&M) Date of decision : 07.11.2023 Jivan Lal @ Jiwan Lal and anr. ....Petitioners Versus StateofPunjaband another 4 Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ JAIN ke Present: Mr. Rajesh K.Dadwal, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Kunal Vinayak, AAG, Punjab Mr. Kripal Singh, Advocate for Mr. Naresh Chander, Advocate for respondent No.2. kkk PANKAJ JAIN, J. (ORAL)
1 By way of present petition, the petitioners are seeking quashing of FIR No.136 dated 15.07.2023, registered for offences punishable under Sections 406/420 IPC and Section 24 of Emigration Act at Police Station Dasuya, District Hoshiarpur on the basis of compromise.
2 On 25.08.2023, the following order was passed :
"The present petition has been moved invoking jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. The petitioners are seeking quashing of FIR No.136 dated 15.07.2023, registered for offences punishable under Sections 406/420 IPC and Section 24 of Emigration Act at Police Station Dasuya, District Hoshiarpur and all subsequent proceedings arising thereto on the basis of compromise.
POOJA SHARMA 2023.11.09 17:07 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.
CRM-M No.42057 of 2023 (O&M) 2 2023:PHHC: 142287 Learned counsel for the petitioners contends that the matter already stands compromised vide compromise deed dated 19.08.2023 (Annexure P-2).
Notice of motion for 07.11.2023.
Mr. Tarun Aggarwal, Sr. DAG, Punjab, who is present in Court accepts notice on behalf of respondent No. 1-State.
Mr. Naresh Chander, Advocate appears on behalf of respondent No.2 and admits the fact of there being compromise between the parties.
In view of the above, the parties are directed to appear before learned Illaqa Magistrate/trial Court on 06.09.2023.
On their doing so, the learned Illaqa Magistrate/trial Court shall record their statements and furnish its report to this Court by the next date of hearing on the following aspects:-
1. Number of persons arrayed as accused in the FIR.
2. Whether any accused is proclaimed offender?
3. Whether the compromise is genuine, voluntary and without any coercion or undue influence?
4. Whether the accused persons are involved in any other case or not?
5. The trial Court is also directed to record the statement of the Investigating Officer as to how many victims/complainants are there in the FIR.
A copy of the report be also sent to the Registrar Judicial of this Court.
Needless to say that in case for any reason the statements are not recorded on the aforesaid date, the learned Illaqa Magistrate/trial Court shall be at liberty to call the parties on any other date but not later than a week thereafter." 3 Pursuant to the aforesaid order, report dated 02.11.2023 from Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Dasuya has been received, which is taken on record. As per the report, the Trial Court has recorded as follows:-
" 1) As per the statement of Investigating Officer ASI Jasvir Singh and POOJA SHARMA 2023.11.09 17:07 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.
POOJA SHARMA 2023.11.09 17:07 CRM-M No.42057 of 2023 (O&M) 3 2023:PHHC: 142287 record, there are two one persons namely Jivan Lal alias Jiwan Lal and Karan Kumar alias Shelly arrayed as accused in the present FIR.
(ii) As per the statement of Investigating Officer ASI Jasvir Singh and record, none of the accused namely Jivan Lal alias Jiwan Lal and Karan Kumar alias Shelly has been declared proclaimed offender in the present case.
(iii) In view of the statement recorded by both the parties, this court is satisfied that the compromise effected between the parties is genuine, voluntary which is not the result of any pressure or coercion.
(iv) As per the statement of Investigating Officer ASI Jasvir Singh and record, none of the accused namely Jivan Lal alias Jiwan Lal and Karan Kumar alias Shelly has been involved in any other FIR.
(V) Statement of ASI Jasvir Singh investigating officer of the present case has been recorded wherein he stated that there is only one complainant/victim namely Jashanpreet Singh in the present FIR." 4 Learned counsel for respondent No.2 admits the fact of parties having compromised and states that he has no objection in case the FIR and all proceedings subsequent thereto against the petitioners are quashed. 5 Similarly, learned State counsel has stated no objection in case the FIR is quashed based upon the compromise dated 19.08.2023 (Annexure P-2).
6 I have heard learned Counsel for the parties and have carefully gone through the records of the case.
7 After considering judgment rendered by the Apex Court in Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab and another, 2012(10) SCC 303, State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Laxmi Narayan and others (2019) 5 SCC 688, Kulwinder Singh & others vs. State of Punjab & another, 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052 and Ram Gopal and another vs. State of Madhya Pradesh, 2021(4) R.C.R. (Criminal) 322 (Criminal Appeal No.1489 of I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.
CRM-M No.42057 of 2023 (O&M) 4 2023:PHHC: 142287 2012 decided on 29" of September, 2021), the proposition of law that emerges from the aforesaid decisions rendered by Apex Court and this Court is:
(a) Power u/s 482 Cr.P.C. vested with this Court is not affected by Section 320 of the Code.
(b) However, wider the power greater the caution.
(oc) The underlining principle while exercising such power is that it can be invoked to quash the proceedings recognizing compromise between the parties in the matters which are overwhelmingly and predominantly of civil character like commercial transactions or arising out of matrimonial relationship or family disputes.
(a) The said power is not to be exercised in the prosecutions involving heinous and serious offences of mental depravity or offences like murder, rape, dacoity etc. as such offences are not private in nature and have a serious impact on society.
(e) Section 482 Cr.P.C. casts duty upon the High Court to advance interest of justice as well. It is in recognition of this duty casted upon the High Court, that Apex Court held that the High Court would not refuse to quash FIR under Section 307 merely because FIR finds mention thereof. High Court can assess nature of injuries sustained, whether such injuries inflicted on vital/delicate parts of the body/nature of weapons used etc. ) Such exercise at the hands of High Court would be permissible only after the evidence is collected after investigation and chargesheet is filed/charges framed during the trial. Such exercise cannot be carried out while the matter is still under investigation.
(3) While quashing FIR in non-compoundable offences even which are of private in nature, High Court is required to consider antecedents of the accused, conduct of the accused and whether he was absconding or whether he has managed the complainant to enter into a compromise.
POOJA SHARMA 2023.11.09 17:07 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.
CRM-M No.42057 of 2023 (O&M) 5 2023:PHHC: 142287 8 Thus, keeping in view the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this Court is of the considered opinion that it is a fit case to exercise jurisdiction vested u/s 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the FIR as :-
(i) The present matter does not fall within the exceptions as carved out in Laxmi Narayan's case (supra).
(ii) The offences are of private nature.
(iii) The parties have compromised.
(iv) As per the report received the compromise is said to be voluntary in its nature.
(v) Complainant/victim has entered into compromise on his own volition.
9 Consequently, the petition is allowed. FIR No.136 dated 15.07.2023, registered for offences punishable under Sections 406/420 IPC and Section 24 of Emigration Act at Police Station Dasuya, District Hoshiarpur and all proceedings arising therefrom, are, hereby, quashed qua the petitioners.
07.11.2023 (PANKAJ JAIN) Pooja sharma-I JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned_: Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No POOJA SHARMA 2023.11.09 17:07 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.