Sandeep Thakur vs State Of Haryana And Another
2022 Latest Caselaw 15708 P&H

CRM-M-53520-2022                                                -1-


            IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
                         CHANDIGARH
(299)
                                   CRM-M-53520-2022
                                   Date of decision:- 05.12.2022

Sandeep Thakur                                                  ....Petitioner

                                     Versus

State of Haryana and another                                    .....Respondents


CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS BAHL


Present:-     Mr. Umesh Kumar Kanwar, Advocate, for the petitioner.

              Mr. Vishal Malik, AAG, Haryana.

              Mr. Rajan Singh Dadwal, Advocate,
              for respondent No.2.

                                   ****

VIKAS BAHL, J. (ORAL)

This is a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. praying for

quashing of FIR No.0067 dated 31.03.2022 registered under Sections 323

and 506 IPC at Police Station Sector 6, District Rewari and all other

consequential proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise.

On 18.11.2022, this Court was pleased to pass the following

order:-

"This is a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. praying for quashing of FIR No.67 dated 31.03.2022, registered under Sections 323 and 506 IPC, at Police Station Sector-6, District Rewari and all other consequential proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that all the persons concerned are party to the compromise.

Notice of motion for 05.12.2022.

1 of 4

On the asking of the Court, Mr. Praveen Bhadu, AAG, Haryana, accepts notice on behalf of respondent No.1 and Mr. Rajan Singh Dadwal, Advocate, appears and accepts notice on behalf of respondent No.2 and admits the factum of compromise.

The parties are directed to appear before the Illaqa Magistrate/trial Court for recording their statements qua compromise within a period of two weeks from today.

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.

November 18, 2022"

In pursuance of the said order, the report has been submitted

by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rewari. The relevant part of

the report is reproduced hereinbelow:-

"It is pertinent here to mention that the compromise entered into between the present parties appears to be genuine and entered into with their free will and consent and without any fear or pressure of any kind. It is also pertinent here to mention that as per the statement of the MHC Anil Kumar, No.33/Rewari, P.S. Sector-6, Dharuhera the present FIR was registered against only one accused namely Sandeep Singh Thakur son of Nasib Singh and above-named accused has not been declared proclaimed offender in any case and he is not involved in any other FIR and there is only one complainant namely Anu Kumari wife of Sandeep Singh Thakur and the accused as well as the complainant are party to the present compromise."

2 of 4

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 their free will and consent and

without any fear or pressure of any kind.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the

petitioner has not been declared proclaimed offender. Learned counsel for

the State, as per instructions, has stated that this fact is correct.

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.

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

3 of 4

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.67 dated 31.03.2022 registered under

Sections 323 and 506 IPC at Police Station Sector 6, District Rewari and

all the subsequent proceedings emanating therefrom are ordered to be

quashed, qua the petitioner.

                                                     ( VIKAS BAHL )
December 05, 2022                                         JUDGE
Davinder Kumar/Sunena
                  Whether reasoned/speaking?         Yes/No
                  Whether reportable?                Yes/No




                                           4 of 4