Punjab-Haryana High Court
Som Singh And Others vs State Of Punjab And Another on 13 October, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
221
CRM-M-12172-2019 (O&M)
Decided on : 13.10.2021
Som Singh and others
. . . Petitioners
Versus
State of Punjab and another
. . . Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS BAHL
(Through Video Conferencing)
PRESENT: Ms. Bandana Dogra, Advocate
for the petitioners.
Mr. Saurav Khurana, DAG, Punjab.
Ms. Neetu, Advocate
for respondent No. 2-complainant.
****
VIKAS BAHL, J. (Oral)
This is a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of
FIR No. 90 dated 20.05.2013 registered under Sections 295, 323 and
149 of the Indian Penal Code,1860 registered at Police Station Dasuya,
District Hoshiarpur (Annexure P-1) and all subsequent proceedings
arising therefrom on the basis of the compromise dated 06.03.2019
(Annexure P-2).
When the matter came up before a Coordinate Bench of
this Court on 15.03.2019, the following order was passed:-
"Learned counsel refers to Annexure P-2 to contend that
a compromise has been effected between the parties and prays
for quashing of FIR No. 90 dated 20.05.2013 (Annexure P-1)
under Sections 295 and 323 read with Section 149 of Indian
Penal Code registered at Police Station Dasuya, District
Hoshiarpur.
1 of 6
CRM-M-12172-2019 (O&M) -2-
Notice of motion for 17.05.2019.
At the asking of the Court, Mr. Amandeep S.Gill, Senior
D.A.G, Punjab accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State.
A complete copy of the paper book has been furnished to the
learned State counsel, in the Court.
At this stage, Mr. Vishal Satija, Advocate causes
representation on behalf of respondent No.2 and admits the
factum of compromise.
Accordingly, the private parties are directed to appear
before the trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate on 18.03.2019 for
recording their statements with regard to
compromise/settlement. Trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate 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 in 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 through fax to the
Registrar Judicial of this Court."
In pursuance of the said order, a report has been submitted
by the Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Dasuya to the Registrar of this
Court. The relevant portion of the said report is reproduced
hereinbelow:-
"In view of above said order statement of complainant,
Davinder Singh and accused/petitioner namely Som Singh,
Makhan Singh have been recorded. Inspector Ashwani Kumar
2 of 6
CRM-M-12172-2019 (O&M) -3-
has also got recorded his statement in which he stated that he is
I.O. In this case and only one victim in this who is complainant
namely Davinder Singh. It is further submitted that complainant
in his statement stated that the present FIR was registered
against five persons namely Jagdev Singh, Amritpal Singh, Son
Singh, Makhan Singh and Avtar Singh and one accused namely
Amritpal Singh has been declared proclaimed offender and
accused Jagdev Singh and Avtar Singh had died in his case. All
the accused/ petitioner in their statement stated that no other
criminal case is pending against them except this case.
As per statement of the parties compromise has been
arrived between them and same appears to be genuine, with
their free will and without any pressure, coercion and undue
influence.
Find enclosed statements of complainant, Davinder
Singh and accused/petitioner namely Som Singh and Makhan
Singh and Inspector Ashwani Kumar (I.O.).
The report is hereby submitted for your kind
consideration."
A perusal of the said report would show that it has been
found that the compromise which has been arrived at between the parties
is genuine and without any fear, coercion or pressure. It has also been
pointed out that two of the accused persons have died and one accused
person namely Amritpal Singh had been declared as proclaimed
offender.
Learned counsel for respondent No. 2-complainant has
submitted that in fact, the compromise in the present case is genuine and
the complainant does not wish to pursue his case against any of the
petitioners including the petitioner No. 2-Amritpal Singh and in fact,
3 of 6
CRM-M-12172-2019 (O&M) -4-
prays to the Court that the FIR and all subsequent proceedings arising
therefrom in the present case may kindly be quashed.
Learned counsel for the complainant has also referred to the
statement of Davinder Singh-complainant which has been recorded by
the Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Dasuya. The said statement is
reproduced hereinbelow:-
"Statement of complainant Davinder Singh S/o Bhulla
Ram, caste Harijan, r/o village Rachhplwan, Police Station
Dasuya, District Hoshiarpur alongwith Sh. Gurpreet Singh
Bhatti Advocate.
Stated that I am complainant in this case and I have
effected the compromise with the accused persons in the
presence of the respectable of the locality. Now I have no
grudge or grievances against the accused persons. I have
effected the compromise voluntarily, without any pressure,
coercion and undue influence and same is genuine. The present
FIR was registered against five persons namely Jagdev Singh,
Amritpal Singh, Som Singh, Makhan Singh and Avtar Singh and
one accused namely Amritpal Singh has been declared
proclaimed offender and accused Jagdev Singh and Avtar
Singh had died in this case. I have no objection if the instant
FIR be quashed against accused persons."
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
Cr.P.C. to allow the compounding of non-compoundable offence and
quash the prosecution where the High Court feel that the same was
4 of 6
CRM-M-12172-2019 (O&M) -5-
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
secure the ends of justice, the criminal proceedings deserve to be
quashed.
5 of 6
CRM-M-12172-2019 (O&M) -6-
In view of what has been discussed hereinabove, the petition is
allowed and FIR No. 90 dated 20.05.2013 registered under Sections
295, 323 and 149 of the Indian Penal Code,1860 registered at Police
Station Dasuya, District Hoshiarpur (Annexure P-1) and all subsequent
proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of the compromise arrived at
between the parties, vide compromise dated 06.03.2019 (Annexure P-
2), are ordered to be quashed, qua the petitioners.
Pending miscellaneous application, if any, shall also stands
disposed of, in view of the abovesaid order.
(VIKAS BAHL)
JUDGE
13.10.2021
Mehak
Whether reasoned/speaking? Yes/No
Whether reportable? Yes/No
6 of 6
