Punjab-Haryana High Court
Amit Kumar And Anr vs State Of Punjab And Another on 13 October, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
217
CRM-M-35823-2021
Decided on : 13.10.2021
Amit Kumar and another
. . . Petitioners
Versus
State of Punjab and another
. . . Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS BAHL
(Through Video Conferencing)
PRESENT: Mr. Kanwar Pahul Singh, Advocate
for the petitioners.
Mr. Saurav Khurana, DAG, Punjab.
****
VIKAS BAHL, J. (Oral)
This is a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of
FIR No. 01 dated 01.01.2020 registered under Sections 406 and 420 of
the Indian Penal Code,1860 and Section 13 of Punjab Travel
Professionals (Regulation) Act, 2014 and Section 24 of Immigration
Act registered at Police Station City Nawashahar, District SBS Nagar
(Annexure P-2) and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the
basis of the compromise dated 30.07.2021 (Annexure P-3).
When the matter came up before this Court on 01.09.2021,
the following order was passed:-
"This is a petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for
quashing of FIR No. 1 dated 01.01.2020 registered under
Sections 406, 420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 13 of
Punjab Travel Professionals (Regulation) Act, 2014 and
Section 24 of Immigration Act at Police Station City
1 of 6
Nawanshahar, District SBS Nagar (Annexure P-2) and
subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of
compromise dated 30.07.2021 (Annexure P-3).
Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that all
the persons concerned are parties to the compromise.
Notice of motion for 13.10.2021.
On asking of the Court, Mr. P. S. Walia, Assistant
Advocate General, Punjab appears and accepts notice on
behalf of the respondent-State.
The parties are directed to appear before the Illaqa
Magistrate/trial Court for recording their statements qua
compromise within a period of 15 days.
The Illaqa Magistrate/trial Court is directed to submit a
report on or before the next date of hearing containing the
following information:-
1. Number of persons arrayed as accused.
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 FIR 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."
In pursuance of the said order, a report has been submitted
by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, SBS Nagar to the Registrar General of
this Court. The relevant portion of the said report is reproduced
hereinbelow:-
"(i) Two accused namely Lovejeet Singh and Amit
Kumar were arraigned as accused in the present
case.
2 of 6
(ii) In the present case, no accused has been declared
as proclaimed offender.
(iii)On the basis of statements suffered before this Court by
the parties, this Court is of the considered view that the
compromise entered between the parties i.e. first
informant Gurpreet and accused persons namely
Lovejeet Singh and Amit Kumar is genuine, voluntary
and without any coercion or undue influence.
(iv) As per the statement recorded by IO/ASI Ram Singh
before this Court, FIR No. 71 dated 25.05.2019, under
Section 13 of Punjab Prevention of Human Smuggling
Act, P.S. A-Division, Amritsar and FIR No. 16 dated
14.02.2019, under Section 420 of IPC, P.S. Dhariwal,
District Gurdaspur have been registered against
accused Amit Kumar, apart from the present FIR.
However, accused in his statement recorded before the
Court, has mentioned regarding registration of FIR No.
21 dated 26.05.2017, under Sections 420, 468, 471, 120-
B of IPC, P.S. Airport, FIR No. 16 dated 14.02.2019,
under Section 420 of IPC, P.S. Dhariwal, District
Gurdaspur, FIR No. 134 dated 02.05.2020, under
Sections 420, 120-B of IPC, Police Station A-Division,
Amritsar and FIR No. 74 dated 25.05.2019, under
Section 13 of Punjab Prevention of Human Smuggling
Act, P.S. A-Division, Amritsar against him.
Further, as per statement of the IO, no FIR has been
found to be registered against accused Lovejeet Singh
apart from the present FIR i.e. FIR No. 01 dated
01.01.2020, under Sections 406, 420 of IPC, Section 13
of Punjab Travel Professionals (Regulation) Act, 2014
and Section 24 of Immigration Act, P.S. City,
Nawashahr, District SBS Nagar.
3 of 6
However, accused Lovejeet Singh in his statement
recorded before the Court has stated regarding
registration of FIR No. 112 dated 17.09.2017, under
Sections 307, 323, 324, 34 of IPC & Section 25/27 of
Arms Act, P.S. Chatiwind, Amritsar against him.
(v) As per the statement recorded by IO/ASI Rajinder
Kumar before this Court, complainant of the present
case is Gurpreet son of Mahinder Pal, who is the only
victim in the present case.
The report is, therefore, submitted for the kind
consideration of the Hon'ble High Court please."
A perusal of the said report would show that although, it has
been stated that some of the parties are involved in other cases also,
however, it has also been recorded that as far as the present case is
concerned, the statements of the complainant as well as the accused have
been recorded in the case and both have stated that the matter has been
compromised and they have no objection in case the FIR is quashed. It
is further stated that the statement of the complainant has been made
voluntarily without any fear, coercion or pressure.
Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that none
of the petitioners were declared proclaimed offender in the present case.
Learned counsel for the State, as per instructions, has stated
that this fact is correct.
As per the Full Bench judgment of this Court in
"Kulwinder Singh and others Vs State of Punjab", 2007 (3) RCR
(Criminal) 1052, it is held that High Court has power under Section 482
4 of 6
Cr.P.C. to allow the compounding of non-compoundable offence and
quash the prosecution where the High Court feel that the same was
required to prevent the abuse of the process of law or otherwise to secure
the ends of justice. This power of quashing is not confined to
matrimonial disputes alone.
Hon'ble the Apex Court in the case of "Gian Singh Vs.
State of Punjab and another", 2012 (4) RCR (Criminal) 543, had also
observed that in order to secure the ends of justice or to prevent the abuse
of process of Court, inherent power can be used by this Court to quash
criminal proceedings in which a compromise has been effected. The
relevant portion of para 57 of the said judgment is reproduced
hereinbelow:-
"57. The position that emerges from the above discussion can
be summarised thus: the power of the High Court in quashing a
criminal proceeding or FIR or complaint in exercise of its
inherent jurisdiction is distinct and different from the power
given to a criminal court for compounding the offences under
Section 320 of the Code. Inherent power is of wide plenitude
with no statutory limitation but it has to be exercised in accord
with the guideline engrafted in such power viz; (i) to secure the
ends of justice or (ii) to prevent abuse of the process of any
Court. XXX---XXX"
This Court has heard the learned counsel for the parties and
has perused the file. After perusing the report submitted by the trial
Court, this Court finds that the matter has been amicably settled between
the petitioners and the complainant. Since the matter has been settled and
the parties have decided to live in peace, this Court feels that in order to
5 of 6
secure the ends of justice, the criminal proceedings deserve to be
quashed.
In view of what has been discussed hereinabove, the
petition is allowed and FIR No. 01 dated 01.01.2020 registered under
Sections 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code,1860 and Section 13 of
Punjab Travel Professionals (Regulation) Act, 2014 and Section 24 of
Immigration Act registered at Police Station City Nawashahar, District
SBS Nagar (Annexure P-2) and all subsequent proceedings arising
therefrom on the basis of the compromise arrived at between the parties,
vide compromise dated 30.07.2021 (Annexure P-3), are ordered to be
quashed, qua the petitioners.
(VIKAS BAHL)
JUDGE
13.10.2021
Mehak
Whether reasoned/speaking? Yes/No
Whether reportable? Yes/No
6 of 6
