Himachal Pradesh High Court
Tersam Singh vs Unknown on 13 May, 2022
Bench: Chander Bhusan Barowalia
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
ON THE DAY OF 13th MAY, 2022
BEFORE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDER BHUSAN BAROWALIA
CRIMINAL MISC. PETITION (MAIN) U/S 482 CRPC No.259 OF 2022
.
Between:-
1. TERSAM SINGH, AGE 27 YEARS S/O SH. ATTAR
SINGH, R/O TARUWALA, DHARAMKOT, PAONTA
SAHIB, DISTRICT SIRMOUR, H.P.
2. DILWAR NEGI, AGE 38 YEARS, S/O SH. VIJAY SINGH
NEGI, R/O HOUSE NO.133/13, WARD NO.6, CANAL
ROAD, PAONTA SAHIB, DISTRICT SIRMOUR, H.P.
...PETITIONERS
(BY MR. RAHUL SINGH VERMA, ADVOCATE)
AND
1. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH
2. HOSHIYAR SINGH S/O SH. OM PRAKASH, R/O
VILLAGE BHUPPUR, TEHSIL PAONTA SAHIB,
DISTRICT SIRMOUR, H.P.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY MR. SHIV PAL MANHANS, ADDL. ADVOCATE GENERAL,
MR. BHUPINDER THAKUR AND MR. YUDHBIR SINGH
THAKUR, DY. ADVOCATES GENERAL)
(BY MR. RAKESH CHAUHAN, ADVOCATE, FOR R-2)
1
WHETHER APPROVED FOR REPORTING? Yes.
This petition coming on for orders this day, the Court passed
the following :
ORDER
The present petition is maintained by the petitioners
under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter to be
called as "the Code") for quashing of F.I.R No.373 of 2012, dated
30.9.2012 under Sections 279, 337, 338 of the Indian Penal Code and
1
Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? Yes.
::: Downloaded on - 13/05/2022 20:07:02 :::CIS
2
Sections 181 and 196 of the Motor Vehicles Act, registered at Police
Station Paonta Sahib, District Sirmour, H.P. alongwith all consequential
proceedings arising out of the said F.I.R., pending before the learned
.
trial Court.
2. Briefly stated the facts, giving rise to the present petition,
as per the prosecution story, are that respondent No.2/complainant
made a written complaint to the police alleging therein that on
30.9.2012 at place Badripur, Activa Scooty bearing registration No.HP-
17-C-0165 struck against a vehicle i.e. Pulser motorcycle bearing
registration No.HP-17A-7489 in a rash and negligent manner so as to
endanger human life and personal safety of others, as a result of
which, driver alongwith one pillion rider of the aforesaid Activa Scooty
sustained injuries. On the basis of the aforesaid information given by
the complainant, the instant FIR came to be lodged. After completion
of the investigation in the aforesaid FIR, police filed challan arraying
both the petitioners, as accused in the learned Court below, but before
the same could be taken to its logical end, petitioners, who are
accused in the aforesaid challan have approached this Court in the
instant proceedings, praying therein for quashing of FIR as well as
consequential proceedings on the basis of Compromise Deed
(Annexure P-2) dated 31st March, 2022. Hence, the present petition.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners has argued that as
the parties have compromised the matter, no purpose will be served
by keeping the proceedings against the petitioners and the
FIR/Challan, may be quashed and set aside.
::: Downloaded on - 13/05/2022 20:07:02 :::CIS
3
4. On the other hand, learned Additional Advocate General
has argued that the offence is not compoundable, so the petition may
be dismissed.
.
5. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 submits that the
parties have entered into compromise, so, the proceedings pending
before the learned Court below may be quashed.
6. To appreciate the arguments of learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the parties, I have gone through the entire
record in detail.
7. Their Lordships of the Hon'ble Supreme Court B.S. Joshi
and others vs. State of Haryana and another, (2003) 4 SCC 675,
have held that if for the purpose of securing the ends of justice,
quashing of FIR becomes necessary, Section 320 would not be a bar to
the exercise of power of quashing. It is well settled that the powers
under section 482 have no limits. Of course, where there is more
power, it becomes necessary to exercise utmost care and caution
while invoking such powers. Their Lordships have held as under:
[6] In Pepsi Food Ltd. and another v. Special Judicial
Magistrate and others ((1998) 5 SCC 749), this Court with
reference to Bhajan Lal's case observed that the guidelines
laid therein as to where the Court will exercise jurisdiction
under Section 482 of the Code could not be inflexible or
laying rigid formulae to be followed by the Courts. Exercise
of such power would depend upon the facts and
circumstances of each case but with the sole purpose to
prevent abuse of the process of any Court or otherwise to
secure the ends of justice. It is well settled that these
powers have no limits. Of course, where there is more
power, it becomes necessary to exercise utmost care and
caution while invoking such powers.
[8] It is, thus, clear that Madhu Limaye's case does
not lay down any general proposition limiting power of
quashing the criminal proceedings or FIR or complaint as
vested in Section 482 of the Code or extraordinary power
under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. We are,
::: Downloaded on - 13/05/2022 20:07:02 :::CIS
4
therefore, of the view that if for the purpose of securing
the ends of justice, quashing of FIR becomes necessary,
Section 320 would not be a bar to the exercise of power of
quashing. It is, however, a different matter depending upon
the facts and circumstances of each case whether to
.
exercise or not such a power.
[15] In view of the above discussion, we hold that
the High Court in exercise of its inherent powers can quash
criminal proceedings or FIR or complaint and Section 320
of the Code does not limit or affect the powers under
Section 482 of the Code.
8. Their Lordships of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Preeti
Gupta and another vs. State of Jharkhand and another, (2010) 7
SCC 667, have held that the ultimate object of justice is to find out
the truth and punish the guilty and protect the innocent. The tendency
of implicating the husband and all his immediate relations is also not
uncommon. At times, even after the conclusion of the criminal trial, it
is difficult to ascertain the real truth. Experience reveals that long and
protracted criminal trials lead to rancour, acrimony and bitterness in
the relationship amongst the parties. The criminal trials lead to
immense sufferings for all concerned. Their Lordships have further
held that permitting complainant to pursue complaint would be abuse
of process of law and the complaint against the appellants was
quashed. Their Lordships have held as under:
[27] A three-Judge Bench (of which one of us, Bhandari, J.
was the author of the judgment) of this Court in Inder
Mohan Goswami and Another v. State of Uttaranchal &
Others, 2007 12 SCC 1 comprehensively examined the
legal position. The court came to a definite conclusion and
the relevant observations of the court are reproduced in
para 24 of the said judgment as under:-
"Inherent powers under section 482 Cr.P.C. though
wide have to be exercised sparingly, carefully and with
great caution and only when such exercise is justified by
the tests specifically laid down in this section itself.
Authority of the court exists for the advancement of
justice. If any abuse of the process leading to injustice is
brought to the notice of the court, then the Court would
be justified in preventing injustice by invoking inherent
powers in absence of specific provisions in the Statute."
[28] We have very carefully considered the
.
averments of the complaint and the statements of all the
witnesses recorded at the time of the filing of the
complaint. There are no specific allegations against the
appellants in the complaint and none of the witnesses
have alleged any role of both the appellants.
[35] The ultimate object of justice is to find out the
truth and punish the guilty and protect the innocent. To
find out the truth is a herculean task in majority of these
complaints. The tendency of implicating husband and all
his immediate relations is also not uncommon. At times,
even after the conclusion of criminal trial, it is difficult to
ascertain the real truth. The courts have to be extremely
careful and cautious in dealing with these complaints and
must take pragmatic realities into consideration while
dealing with matrimonial cases. The allegations of
harassment of husband's close relations who had been
living in different cities and never visited or rarely visited
the place where the complainant resided would have an
entirely different complexion. The allegations of the
complaint are required to be scrutinized with great care
and circumspection.
36. Experience reveals that long and protracted criminal
trials lead to rancour, acrimony and bitterness in the
relationship amongst the parties. It is also a matter of
common knowledge that in cases filed by the complainant
if the husband or the husband's relations had to remain in
jail even for a few days, it would ruin the chances of
amicable settlement altogether. The process of suffering
is extremely long and painful.
[38] The criminal trials lead to immense sufferings
for all concerned. Even ultimate acquittal in the trial may
also not be able to wipe out the deep scars of suffering of
ignominy. Unfortunately a large number of these
complaints have not only flooded the courts but also have
led to enormous social unrest affecting peace, harmony
and happiness of the society. It is high time that the
legislature must take into consideration the pragmatic
realities and make suitable changes in the existing law. It
is imperative for the legislature to take into consideration
the informed public opinion and the pragmatic realities in
consideration and make necessary changes in the
relevant provisions of law. We direct the Registry to send
a copy of this judgment to the Law Commission and to the
Union Law Secretary, Government of India who may place
it before the Hon'ble Minister for Law & Justice to take
appropriate steps in the larger interest of the society.
9. Their Lordships of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Jitendra
Raghuvanshi and others vs. Babita Raghuvanshi and another,
(2013) 4 SCC 58, have held that criminal proceedings or FIR or
.
complaint can be quashed under Section 482 Cr. P.C. in appropriate
cases in order to meet ends of justice. Even in non-compoundable
offences pertaining to matrimonial disputes, if court is satisfied that
parties have settled the disputes amicably and without any pressure,
then for purpose of securing ends of justice, FIR or complaint or
subsequent criminal proceedings in respect of offences can be
quashed. Their Lordships have held as under:
[13] As stated earlier, it is not in dispute that after
filing of a complaint in respect of the offences punishable
under Sections 498A and 406 of IPC, the parties, in the
instant case, arrived at a mutual settlement and the
complainant also has sworn an affidavit supporting the
stand of the appellants. That was the position before the
trial Court as well as before the High Court in a petition
filed under Section 482 of the Code. A perusal of the
impugned order of the High Court shows that because the
mutual settlement arrived at between the parties relate
to non-compoundable offence, the court proceeded on a
wrong premise that it cannot be compounded and
dismissed the petition filed under Section 482. A perusal
of the petition before the High Court shows that the
application filed by the appellants was not for
compounding of non-compoundable offences but for the
purpose of quashing the criminal proceedings.
[14] The inherent powers of the High Court under
Section 482 of the Code are wide and unfettered. In B.S.
Joshi, this Court has upheld the powers of the High Court
under Section 482 to quash criminal proceedings where
dispute is of a private nature and a compromise is
entered into between the parties who are willing to settle
their differences amicably. We are satisfied that the said
decision is directly applicable to the case on hand and the
High Court ought to have quashed the criminal
proceedings by accepting the settlement arrived at.
[15] In our view, it is the duty of the courts to
encourage genuine settlements of matrimonial disputes,
particularly, when the same are on considerable increase.
Even if the offences are non-compoundable, if they relate
to matrimonial disputes and the court is satisfied that the
parties have settled the same amicably and without any
pressure, we hold that for the purpose of securing ends of
justice, Section 320 of the Code would not be a bar to the
exercise of power of quashing of FIR, complaint or the
subsequent criminal proceedings.
.
[16] There has been an outburst of matrimonial
disputes in recent times. The institution of marriage
occupies an important place and it has an important role
to play in the society. Therefore, every effort should be
made in the interest of the individuals in order to enable
them to settle down in life and live peacefully. If the
parties ponder over their defaults and terminate their
disputes amicably by mutual agreement instead of
fighting it out in a court of law, in order to do complete
justice in the matrimonial matters, the courts should be
less hesitant in exercising its extraordinary jurisdiction. It
is trite to state that the power under Section 482 should
be exercised sparingly and with circumspection only when
the court is convinced, on the basis of material on record,
that allowing the proceedings to continue would be an
abuse of the process of the court or that the ends of
justice require that the proceedings ought to be quashed.
We also make it clear that exercise of such power would
depend upon the facts and circumstances of each case
and it has to be exercised in appropriate cases in order to
do real and substantial justice for the administration of
which alone the courts exist. It is the duty of the courts to
encourage genuine settlements of matrimonial disputes
and Section 482 of the Code enables the High Court and
Article 142 of the Constitution enables this Court to pass
such orders.
[17] In the light of the above discussion, we hold
that the High Court in exercise of its inherent powers can
quash the criminal proceedings or FIR or complaint in
appropriate cases in order to meet the ends of justice and
Section 320 of the Code does not limit or affect the
powers of the High Court under Section 482 of the Code.
Under these circumstances, we set aside the impugned
judgment of the High Court dated 04.07.2012 passed in
M.C.R.C. No. 2877 of 2012 and quash the proceedings in
Criminal Case No. 4166 of 2011 pending on the file of
Judicial Magistrate Class-I, Indore."
10. Similarly, Hon'ble Supreme Court in Parbatbhai Aahir
alias Parbatbhai Bhimsinhbhai Karmur and others vs. State of
Gujarat and another, (2017) 9 Supreme Court Cases 641,
wherein it has been held as under :
"16. The broad principles which emerge from the
precedents on the subject, may be summarised in
the following propositions:
16.1. Section 482 preserves the inherent powers
of the High Court to prevent an abuse of the
process of any court or to secure the ends of
justice. The provision does not confer new
powers. It only recognises and preserves powers
.
which inhere in the High Court;
16.2. The invocation of the jurisdiction of the
High Court to quash a First Information Report or
a criminal proceeding on the ground that a
settlement has been arrived at between the
offender and the victim is not the same as the
invocation of jurisdiction for the purpose of
compounding an offence. While compounding an
offence, the power of the court is governed by
the provisions of Section 320 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973. The power to quash
under Section 482 is attracted even if the offence
is non-compoundable.
16.3. In forming an opinion whether a criminal
proceeding or complaint should be quashed in
exercise of its jurisdiction under Section 482, the
High Court must evaluate whether the ends of
justice would justify the exercise of the inherent
power;
16.4 While the inherent power of the High Court
has a wide ambit and plenitude it has to be
exercised; (i) to secure the ends of justice or (ii)
to prevent an abuse of the process of any court;
16.5 The decision as to whether a complaint or
First Information Report should be quashed on
the ground that the offender and victim have
settled the dispute, revolves ultimately on the
facts and circumstances of each case and no
exhaustive elaboration of principles can be
formulated;
16.6. In the exercise of the power under Section
482 and while dealing with a plea that the
dispute has been settled, the High Court must
have due regard to the nature and gravity of the
offence. Heinous and serious offences involving
mental depravity or offences such as murder,
rape and dacoity cannot appropriately be
quashed though the victim or the family of the
victim have settled the dispute. Such offences
are, truly speaking, not private in nature but
have a serious impact upon society. The decision
to continue with the trial in such cases is founded
on the overriding element of public interest in
punishing persons for serious offences;
16.7. As distinguished from serious offences,
there may be criminal cases which have an
overwhelming or predominant element of a civil
dispute. They stand on a distinct footing in so far
as the exercise of the inherent power to quash is
concerned;
16.8. Criminal cases involving offences which
arise from commercial, financial, mercantile,
partnership or similar transactions with an
essentially civil flavour may in appropriate
situations fall for quashing where parties have
settled the dispute;
16.9 In such a case, the High Court may quash
the criminal proceeding if in view of the
.
compromise between the disputants, the
possibility of a conviction is remote and the
continuation of a criminal proceeding would
cause oppression and prejudice; and
16.10. There is yet an exception to the principle
set out in propositions 16.8 and 16.9 above.
Economic offences involving the financial and
economic well-being of the state have
implications which lie beyond the domain of a
mere dispute between private disputants. The
High Court would be justified in declining to
quash where the offender is involved in an
activity akin to a financial or economic fraud or
misdemeanour. The consequences of the act
complained of upon the financial or economic
system will weigh in the balance.
Even if, the trial is allowed to be continued, as the parties
have compromised the matter, there are bleak chances of conviction
to secure the ends of justice.
11. Thus, taking into consideration the law as discussed
hereinabove, I find that the interest of justice will be met, in case, the
proceedings are quashed, as the parties have already compromised
the matter.
12. Accordingly, looking into all attending facts and
circumstances, I find this case to be a fit case to exercise jurisdiction
vested in this Court, under Section 482 of the Code and accordingly
F.I.R No.373 of 2012, dated 30.9.2012 under Sections 279, 337, 338 of
the Indian Penal Code and Sections 181 and 196 of the Motor Vehicles
Act, registered at Police Station Paonta Sahib, District Sirmour, is
ordered to be quashed. Consequently, the proceedings pending
before the learned Trial Court, arising out of the aforesaid FIR, are also
ordered to be quashed and the petitioners-accused are acquitted of
the charges framed against them.
13. The petition is accordingly disposed of alongwith pending
.
applications, if any.
( Chander Bhusan Barowalia )
Judge
May, 2022
(CS)
r to
