Jagsir Singh And Others vs State Of Punjab And Another
2022 Latest Caselaw 17403 P&H

CRM-M-33470-2022                                                        1


          IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT
                        CHANDIGARH
                          ****

CRM-M-33470-2022 Date of decision:21.12.2022

Jagsir Singh and others ... Petitioners Versus

State of Punjab and another

... Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS BAHL

Present: Mr. Amanpreet (A.P.) Singh, Advocate for the petitioners.

Mr. Tarun Aggarwal, Sr. DAG, Punjab.

Mr. Kunwar Rajan, Advocate for respondent No.2.

VIKAS BAHL, J.(ORAL)

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

of FIR No.139 dated 19.06.2022 registered under Section 3(X) of the

Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act,

1989 at Police Station City South, District Moga, Punjab (Annexure P-1)

along with all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of

compromise.

On 05.12.2022, this Court was pleased to pass the following

order:-

"This is a petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of FIR No.139 dated 19.06.2022 registered under Section 3 (X) of Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 at Police Station City South, District Moga, Punjab and all the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise.

Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that all the persons concerned are party to the compromise.

1 of 4

Notice of motion for 21.12.2022.

On asking of the Court, Mr. Tarun Aggarwal, Sr. DAG, Punjab appears and accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State and Mr. Kunwar Rajan, Advocate appears on behalf of respondent No.2.

The parties are directed to appear before the Illaqa Magistrate/trial Court for recording their statements qua compromise within a period of 10 days.

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.

                                                         (VIKAS BAHL)
            05.12.2022                                      JUDGE"

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

Chief Judicial Magistrate, Moga. The relevant portion of the said report is

reproduced hereinbelow:-

"3. It is further submitted as under:-

I. As per statement of above said S.C. Sukhjinder Singh, there are four accused namely Jagsir Singh, Paramjit Kaur, Lovepreet Singh and Jagjit Singh alias Bittu in the FIR no.139 dated 19.06.2022 registered under Section 3 (X) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 at P.S. City South, Moga.

II. As per statement of above said S.C. Sukhjinder Singh, no accused is proclaimed offender in the above said FIR.

III.As per statements of parties, compromise effected between them is genuine, voluntary and without any coercion and undue influence. IV.As per statement of above said S.C. Sukhjinder Singh, above said accused persons are not involved in any other FIR.

V. As per statement of above said S.C. Sukhjinder

2 of 4

Singh, there is only one victim/complainant namely Chhinder Kaur in the above said FIR."

A perusal of the above said report would show that the

petitioners and respondent No.2 have appeared and suffered statements with

respect to the compromise, which have been found to be voluntary, genuine,

and out of free will.

Learned counsel for the petitioners has further submitted that

the petitioners were not declared proclaimed offenders in the present case.

Learned State counsel has stated that he has no objection in

case the FIR is quashed on the basis of compromise qua the petitioners.

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

two parties.

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.

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

3 of 4

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."

In view of what has been discussed hereinabove, this petition is

allowed and FIR No.139 dated 19.06.2022 registered under Section 3(X) of

the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act,

1989 at Police Station City South, District Moga, Punjab (Annexure P-1)

along with all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of

compromise, are ordered to be quashed qua the petitioners.

                                                 (VIKAS BAHL)
21.12.2022                                          JUDGE
Ishwar


             Whether speaking/reasoned                Yes/No
             Whether reportable                       Yes/No


                                4 of 4