Punjab-Haryana High Court
Harinder Singh Gill And Anr vs State Of Punjab And Another on 9 December, 2022
CRM-M-41279-2021 (O&M) -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
(243)
CRM-M-41279-2021 (O&M)
Date of decision:- 09.12.2022
Harinder Singh Gill and another
....Petitioners
Versus
State of Punjab and another
.....Respondents
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS BAHL
Present:- Mr. Gurminder Singh, Senior Advocate
with Mr. Jatinder Singh Gill, Advocate,
for the petitioners.
Mr. Iqbal S. Mann, DAG, Punjab.
Mr. B.S. Toor, 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.36 dated 27.03.2017, registered under Sections 420
and 120-B IPC, at Police Station Sadar Sri Muktsar Sahib and all other
consequential proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise.
Learned Senior counsel for the petitioners as well as learned
counsel for respondent No.2 have jointly submitted that initially the
petitioners had filed the present petition on merits and during the course
of proceedings, a compromise crystallized and a Co-ordinate Bench of this
Court, vide order dated 08.09.2022 had directed the parties to record their
statements. The relevant portion of the said order is reproduced as under:-
1 of 6
CRM-M-41279-2021 (O&M) -2-
"The learned senior counsel has submitted that it is a case
where there was a financial dispute between the petitioners and
respondent No.2 and thereafter the present FIR was lodged. During
the course of investigation, a cancellation report was prepared by the
police and thereafter a settlement was arrived at between the parties
vide Annexure P-3 wherein a Memorandum of Understanding was
also executed. The respondent No.2 had taken part payment but
thereafter was not honouring the agreement and thereafter petitioners
had approached this Court by filing the present petition for quashing
of the FIR based upon merits. However, during the pendency of the
present petition, the matter was again amicably settled between the
parties and now it has been fully settled and both the parties have
performed their respective obligations. He submitted that respondent
No.2 has now filed a categorical affidavit before this Court dated
02.05.2022 wherein she has stated that she has already received a sum
of Rs.1.80 Crores from the petitioners and has completed all the
formalities which she was required to fulfill under the terms and
conditions of the MoU dated 28.01.2019 and she has made the
compromise without any coercion or undue influence. It has been
further stated in the affidavit that the dispute between the parties has
been amicably settled and she has no objection in case the FIR in
question is quashed.
It has been pointed out by the learned senior counsel for the
petitioners as well as the learned counsel appearing on behalf of
respondent No.2 that respondent No.2 is an old lady aged 84 years
and is now bed ridden and both the learned counsels have made a
request that since the matter has already been compromised between
the parties, the FIR can be quashed based upon compromise in view of
the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in State of
Madhya Pradesh Vs. Laxmi Narayan and others 2019(5) SCC 688,
since the matter is purely pertaining to financial dispute. He further
submitted that in the interest of justice the FIR may be quashed based
upon compromise. They have however submitted that since respondent
No.2 is an old lady and also bed ridden, she is not able to appear
before the learned Illaqa Magistrate/trial Judge for getting her
statement recorded and therefore has prayed that she may be
permitted to get her statement recorded through video conference.
2 of 6
CRM-M-41279-2021 (O&M) -3-
In view of the aforesaid position and considering the aforesaid
facts and circumstances, petitioners No.1 and 2 are directed to appear
before the learned Illaqa Magistrate/trial Judge on 23.09.2022 for
getting their statements recorded with regard to the genuineness and
voluntariness of the compromise.
The Illaqa Magistrate/trial Court is directed to submit a report
alongwith copies of statements of the parties on or before the next date
of hearing, containing the following information as well:
i) Number of persons arrayed as accused in FIR;
ii) Whether any accused is proclaimed offender;
iii) Status of trial/proceedings and
iv) Whether the compromise is genuine, voluntary and without any
coercion or undue influence.
So far as respondent No.2 is concerned, since both the learned
counsel for the parties have submitted that she is an old lady aged 84
years and is also bed ridden, permission is granted for getting her
statement recorded through video conference. The date and time of the
video conference for the purpose of recording of her statement shall be
fixed by the learned Illaqa Magistrate/trial Judge at convenience after
consulting the same with the counsel for respondent No.2. The learned
trial Court shall ensure that the counsel for respondent No.2 remains
present alongwith respondent No.2 at the time of video conference and
shall also ensure that the counsel identifies respondent No.2 at the
time of video conference.
Adjourned to 31.10.2022.
To be taken up immediately after urgent cases.
(JASGURPREET SINGH PURI)
JUDGE
September 08, 2022"
In pursuance of the said order, the report has been submitted
by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sri Muktsar Sahib to the
Registrar (Criminal) of this Court. The relevant part of the report is
reproduced hereinbelow:-
"In view of the aforesaid statements, the report as desired by
3 of 6
CRM-M-41279-2021 (O&M) -4-
Hon'ble Punjab and Haryana High Court is hereby submitted as
follows:-
1. There are only two persons arraigned in the FIR as accused. As
per the record and statement of investigating officer, none of the accused
is absconding or declared as proclaimed offender in the case;
2. The name of the complainant is Mrs. Pritam Chahal and there is
only complainant in the present FIR.
3. The FIR is still under investigation and challan has not yet been
presented; and
4. The compromise effected between the parties appears to be
genuine, voluntary and without any coercion or undue influence."
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 seems to be genuine, voluntary and
without any coercion or undue influence.
Learned Senior counsel for the petitioners has submitted that
the petitioners have 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,
4 of 6
CRM-M-41279-2021 (O&M) -5-
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.
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
5 of 6
CRM-M-41279-2021 (O&M) -6-
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.36 dated 27.03.2017, registered under
Sections 420 and 120-B IPC, at Police Station Sadar Sri Muktsar Sahib
and all the subsequent proceedings emanating therefrom are ordered to be
quashed, qua the petitioners.
Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, stand disposed
of.
( VIKAS BAHL )
December 09, 2022 JUDGE
naresh.k
Whether reasoned/speaking? Yes/No
Whether reportable? Yes/No
6 of 6
