Karan Singla And Anr vs State Of Punjab And Another

Citation : 2024 Latest Caselaw 5817 P&H
Judgement Date : 14 March, 2024

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Karan Singla And Anr vs State Of Punjab And Another on 14 March, 2024

                                                                                2024:PHHC:036969
                  CRM-M-62048-2023

                                                                                              1

                               IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
                                              CHANDIGARH
                  295
                                                                          CRM-M-62048-2023
                                                                  Date of Decision:-14.03.2024
                  Karan Singla and Anr.
                                                                               ......Petitioners
                                                      Versus
                  State of Punjab and Anr.
                                                                             ......Respondents

                  CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK JAIN
                                        ****
                  Present:        Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Arora, Advocate for the petitioners.

                                  Mr. Rajinder Singh Bhatta, DAG, Punjab.

                                  Mr. Kulbir Singh, Advocate for respondent No.2

                                                    ****
                  ALOK JAIN, J. (Oral)

1. The instant petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of FIR No.217 dated 07.10.2022, under Sections 307, 452, 324, 148, 149, 506 and 34 of IPC (offence under Section 34 added later on), registered at Police Station City South, District Moga and subsequent proceeding arising therefrom on the basis of compromise dated 06.09.2023 (Annexure P-3).

2. Keeping in view the fact that the parties entered into a settlement, this Court vide order dated 11.12.2023 directed the parties to appear before the Illaqa Magistrate/trial Court for getting their statements recorded in that regard. Pursuant thereto, a report dated 25.01.2024 has been received from Chief Judicial Magistrate, Moga, stating that the compromise arrived at between the parties is voluntary and the same is without any pressure, coercion or undue influence. Manju 2024.03.23 10:40 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

2024:PHHC:036969 CRM-M-62048-2023 2

3. Learned State counsel and learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No.2 admit the factum of compromise and submit that they have no objection in quashing of the FIR on that basis.

4. Perusal of the aforesaid report establishes that the parties have amicably settled their dispute, and continuance of criminal proceedings in such a situation will be an exercise in futility, as the chances of conviction are bleak. The power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. can be exercised in such matters. It has been held by Supreme Court of India in cases Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and another 2012(10) SCC 303 and Narinder Singh and others v. State of Punjab and another 2014(6) SCC 406 that criminal cases having overwhelmingly civil character, particularly those arising out of commercial transactions or matrimonial relationships or family disputes, should be quashed when the parties have resolved the disputes among themselves in a bona fide manner.

5. The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of "State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Laxmi Narayan" (2019) 5 SCC 688, has upheld that the High Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. can quash the criminal proceedings in respect of non compoundable offences which are private in nature and do not have serious impact on society.

6. More so, the trial would also be a futile exercise as there is no cogent evidence to reach the conviction. Although the last part of the argument is not sustainable, as the Courts are well within its powers to proceed in the matter with the evidence available and merely because the parties have compromised would not be a ground, the trial would be Manju 2024.03.23 10:40 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 2024:PHHC:036969 CRM-M-62048-2023 3 futility, however, considering the other aspect that the future of the daughter of the petitioner will be capitalized.

7. Keeping in view the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the aforesaid judgment, the present petition stands allowed and FIR No.217 dated 07.10.2022, under Sections 307, 452, 324, 148, 149, 506 and 34 of IPC (offence under Section 34 added later on), registered at Police Station City Sough, District Moga and subsequent proceeding arising therefrom, are hereby quashed qua the petitioners subject to costs of Rs.10,000/- to be paid by the petitioners (Collectively) and Rs.5,000/- to be paid by respondent No.2 within a period of two weeks from today in the account of the Poor Patients Welfare Fund, PGIMER, Chandigarh.




                                                                    (ALOK JAIN)
                                                                      JUDGE
                  14.03.2024
                  manju

                                     Whether speaking/reasoned:-    Yes/No
                                     Whether Reportable:-           Yes/No




Manju
2024.03.23 10:40
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document