Punjab-Haryana High Court
Chhotu Ram And Ors vs State Of Haryana And Anr on 19 December, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
Sr. No.266 CRM-M-43580 of 2022
Date of Decision: December 19, 2022
Chhotu Ram and others
...Petitioners
Versus
State of Haryana and another
...Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMAN CHAUDHARY
Present:- Mr. Vikas Bishnoi, Advocate
for the petitioners.
Ms. Aditi Girdhar, AAG, Haryana.
Mr. Deepak Vashishth, Advocate
for respondent No.2.
AMAN CHAUDHARY, J.
Present petition has been filed for quashing of FIR No.438,
dated 03.07.2020, under Sections 147, 149, 447 and 506 of Indian Penal
Code, registered at Police Station Sadar Hisar, District Hisar, and all
other consequential proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of the
compromise dated 17.09.2022 (Annexure P-2).
Notice of motion was issued on 21.09.2022 and both the
parties were directed to appear before the trial Court for recording their
statements in the context of genuineness of the compromise. The trial
Court was also directed to submit its report with regard to genuineness of
the compromise.
Pursuant to the aforesaid order, report dated 07.10.2022 has
been received from the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hisar. A
perusal of the said report reveals that statements of the concerned persons
have been recorded in the present case, who have stated that the matter
has been settled between the parties and they have no objection in case
1 of 3
the FIR in question is quashed and the compromise effected between
them is genuine, without any undue influence and coercion. It is also
stated in the report that one another FIR is pending against petitioners
Chhotu Ram, Sunil, Rajveer and Manish Kumar and none of them has
been declared as proclaimed offender.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have also
gone through the case file.
After perusing the report submitted by the trial Court, this
Court finds that the matter has been amicably settled between the
petitioner(s) and the complainant(s). Since the matter has been settled and
the parties have decided to live in peace, this Court is of the view 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 view 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
2 of 3
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 the above, the petition is allowed andFIR No.438,
dated 03.07.2020, under Sections 147, 149, 447 and 506 of Indian Penal
Code, registered at Police Station Sadar Hisar, District Hisar, and all
other consequential proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of the
compromise 17.09.2022 (Annexure P-2), are quashed qua the petitioners.
December 19, 2022 (AMAN CHAUDHARY)
rimpal JUDGE
Whether reasoned/speaking: Yes/No
Whether reportable: Yes/No
3 of 3
