Punjab-Haryana High Court
Manikaran [email protected] vs State Of Punjab And Another on 1 December, 2022
CRM-M-47467-2021 -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
(325)
CRM-M-47467-2021
Date of decision:- 01.12.2022
Manikaran Bawa @ Mani
....Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab and another
.....Respondents
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS BAHL
Present:- Mr. Jatinder Singh Gill, Advocate,
for the petitioner.
Mr. Iqbal S. Mann, DAG, Punjab.
Mr. Sehajpreet Singh Khalsa, Advocate
for Mr. Vinay Kumar, Advocate
for respondent No.2.
****
VIKAS BAHL, J. (ORAL)
This is a petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. for
quashing of FIR No.105 dated 24.08.2018, registered under Sections 451,
323 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, at Police Station
Kathunangal, District Amritsar on the basis of compromise.
On 16.11.2021, a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court was
pleased to pass the following order:-
"Present petition has been filed for quashing of FIR No.105
dated 24.08.2018 registered under Sections 451, 323 and 506 of the
Indian Penal Code, 1860 at Police Station Kathunangal, District
1 of 6
Amritsar, qua the petitioner on the basis of compromise entered into
between the parties.
Learned counsel for the petitioner argues that in order to live
peacefully, parties have entered into compromise on 29.09.2021
(Annexure P-2), according to which, both the parties have agreed not
to proceed further with the FIR in question.
Notice of motion.
Mr. Sandeep Singh Deol, learned Deputy Advocate General,
Punjab, who is present in the Court, accepts notice on behalf of
respondent No. 1.
Mr. Vinay Kumar, Advocate, who is also present in the Court,
accepts notice on behalf of respondent No.2-complainant. He admits
the factum of the compromise entered into between the parties and
raises no objection, in case the FIR in question is quashed on the basis
of the said compromise.
Adjourned to 24.01.2022.
In the meantime, the parties are directed to appear before the
trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate for recording of their statement with
regard to the compromise/settlement on 02.12.2021 by moving
appropriate application or by presenting this order.
The Trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate is directed to submit the
report on or before the next date of hearing containing the following
information:
1. Number of persons arrayed as accused in the FIR,
2. Whether any accused is a 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, and
5. The Trial Court is also directed to record the statement of the
Investigating Officer so as to know how many
victims/complainants are there in the FIR and all the
victims/complainants as well as accused are party to the
compromise in question.
The question of imposition of cost for wasting valuable time of
police as well as the Court will be assessed at the time of final hearing
of present petition, in case the FIR is to be quashed.
2 of 6
(HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI)
November 16, 2021 JUDGE"
In pursuance of the said order, the report has been submitted
by the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Amritsar, to the Registrar General of
this Court. The relevant part of the report is reproduced hereinbelow:-
"The report is as under:-
(1) The number of persons arrayed as accused in the FIR is three
namely Manikaran Bawa, Sandeep Kumar and Jaskarandeep
Singh @ Jassu.
(2) As per the report of the Ahlmad, no proclamation proceedings
were initiated against the petitioner or any other accused
person.
(3) After perusing the statements of the parties, this Court is
satisfied that the compromise between the petitioner/accused
and respondent No.2 is genuine, voluntary and without any
coercion or undue influence.
(4) As per the statement of the Investigating Officer, there is no
other FIR against the petitioner/accused.
(5) As per the statement of the Investigating Officer, there is only
one victim/complainant in the present FIR whereas there are
three accused persons i.e. the petitioner Manikaran Bawa,
Sandeep Kumar and Jaskarandeep Singh @ Jassu. That, the
complainant and one of the accused namely Manikaran Bawa
are the only parties to the compromise in question."
A perusal of the said report would show that statements of
the concerned persons have been recorded in the case, who have stated
that the matter has been compromised and they have no objection in case
the FIR in question is quashed. They have further stated that the said
compromise is being entered into with there genuine, voluntary and
without any coercion or undue influence. A perusal of the report would
further show that in the present case, there are three accused persons
3 of 6
whereas one accused has filed the present petition.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the
judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court titled as Jayrajsinh
Digvijaysinh Rana Vs. State of Gujarat and another, reported as 2012
(12) SCC 401, to contend that where there is a partial compromise with
some of the accused then also, the proceedings against the said
petitioner/accused should be quashed as the same would not even
remotely result in conviction of the said accused.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has also relied upon the
judgment dated 04.07.2019 passed in CRM-M-16318-2015 titled as
'Dalip Mandal and another Vs. State of U.T., Chandigarh and others',
in which case, the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court was pleased to allow
the petition qua the petitioners only although, the matter had not been
compromised between all the parties.
Learned counsel for respondent No.2 has again reiterated that
the matter has been settled and the said compromise is in the interest of
all the persons and would help in bringing out peace and amity between
the parties.
This Court has heard the learned counsel for the parties and
has perused the file.
After perusing the report submitted by the learned trial Court,
this Court finds that the matter has been amicably settled between the
petitioner 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
4 of 6
qua the present petitioner.
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 is of the opinion that the same is
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".
In view of what has been discussed hereinabove, this petition
is allowed and FIR No.105 dated 24.08.2018, registered under Sections
5 of 6
451, 323 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, at Police Station
Kathunangal, District Amritsar and all the subsequent proceedings
emanating therefrom, are ordered to be quashed/set aside, qua the
petitioner.
( VIKAS BAHL )
December 01, 2022 JUDGE
naresh.k/sunena
Whether reasoned/speaking? Yes/No
Whether reportable? Yes/No
6 of 6
