Punjab-Haryana High Court
Pritam Singh And Ors vs State Of Punjab And Ors on 30 April, 2024
Author: Sandeep Moudgil
Bench: Sandeep Moudgil
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:059513
CRM-M-13511 of 2024(O&M) 2024:PHHC:059513 1
284 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-13511 of 2024(O&M)
Date of decision : April 30, 2024
Pritam Singh and others
...... Petitioners
Versus
State of Punjab and others
...... Respondents
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MOUDGIL
***
Present :-Mr. B. R. Rana-I, Advocate
for the petitioners.
Mr. Jaspal Singh Guru, AAG., Punjab.
Mr. Vipan Kumar Sharma, Advocate
for respondent Nos.2 to 4.
***
SANDEEP MOUDGIL, J (Oral)
CM-18353-2024 This is an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C for placing on record the amended Memo of Parties as father's name of petitioner No.3 and his UID and Phone number were typed incorrectly in the Memo of Parties.
For the reasons mentioned in the application, the same is allowed.
Amended Memo of Parties is taken on record. Registry is directed to tag the same at an appropriate place. CRM-M-13511 of 2024
1. This is a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of Complaint No. COMI/79/15 dated 03.09.2015, under Sections 323, 324,294, 506,148,149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 3 of SC/ST (Prevention of Attrocities) Act, 1989 (Annexure P-1) as well as order dated 23.08.2018 (Annexure P-2) vide which the petitioners have 1 of 4 ::: Downloaded on - 04-05-2024 06:46:41 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:059513 CRM-M-13511 of 2024(O&M) 2024:PHHC:059513 2 been summoned to face trial, on the basis of compromise dated 25.08.2023 (Annexure P-3) with all the consequential proceedings arising therefrom.
During the pendency of the dispute, the parties have compromised the matter and filed the present petition for quashing of FIR.
Vide order dated 15.03.2024, parties were directed to appear before the Illaqa Magistrate/Trial Court and report with regard to the genuineness of the compromise was called for.
The report dated 18.04.2024 has been received from Judicial Magistrate First Class, Jagraon, stating that the parties have entered into a compromise, which is genuine, voluntary and without any coercion or undue influence.
Learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.2 to 4 submits that he has no objection to the quashing of present FIR.
Full Bench of this Court in Kulwinder Singh and others vs. State of Punjab, 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052, has held:-
"The only inevitable conclusion from the above discussion is that there is no statutory bar under the Cr.P.C. which can affect the inherent power of this Court under Section 482. Further, the same cannot be limited to matrimonial cases alone and the Court has the wide power to quash the proceedings even in noncompoundable offences notwithstanding the bar under Section 320 of the Cr.P.C., in order to prevent the abuse of law and to secure the ends of justice.
The power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. is to be exercised Ex-Debitia Justitia to prevent an abuse of process of Court. There can neither be an exhaustive list nor the defined para- meters to enable a High Court to invoke or exercise its inherent powers. It will always depend upon the facts and circumstances of each case. The power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. has
2 of 4 ::: Downloaded on - 04-05-2024 06:46:42 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:059513 CRM-M-13511 of 2024(O&M) 2024:PHHC:059513 3 no limits. However, the High Court will exercise it sparingly and with utmost care and caution. The exercise of power has to be with circumspection and restraint. The Court is a vital and an extra-ordinary effective instrument to maintain and control social order. The Courts play role of paramount importance in achieving peace, harmony and ever- lasting congeniality in society. Resolution of a dispute by way of a compromise between two warring groups, therefore, should attract the immediate and prompt attention of a Court which should endeavour to give full effect to the same unless such compromise is abhorrent to lawful composition of the society or would promote savagery."
The legal principles as laid down for quashing of the judgment were also approved by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of 'Gian Singh Versus State of Punjab and another,(2012) 10 SCC 303'. Furthermore, the broad principles for exercising the powers under Section 482 were summarized by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of 'Parbatbhai Aahir @ Parbatbhai Bhimsinhbhai Karmur and others versus State of Gujarat and another" (2017) 9 SCC 641'.
It is evident that in view of the amicable resolution of the issues amongst the parties, no useful purpose would be served by continuation of the proceedings. The furtherance of the proceedings is likely to be a waste of judicial time and there appears to be no chances of conviction.
In view of the above, Complaint No. COMI/79/15 dated 03.09.2015, under Sections 323, 324,294, 506,148,149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 3 of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (Annexure P-1) as well as order dated 23.08.2018 (Annexure P-2) vide which the petitioners have been summoned to face trial, is quashed qua the petitioners the basis of compromise dated 25.08.2023.
3 of 4 ::: Downloaded on - 04-05-2024 06:46:42 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:059513 CRM-M-13511 of 2024(O&M) 2024:PHHC:059513 4 (Annexure P-3).
The present petition is hereby allowed.
April 30, 2024 ( SANDEEP MOUDGIL)
archana JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No
Whether Reportable : Yes/No
4 of 4
::: Downloaded on - 04-05-2024 06:46:42 :::