Baldev Singh Alias Deba And Others vs State Of Punjab And Others
2022 Latest Caselaw 17511 P&H

       CRM-M-56603-2022                                                1

      IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                    AT CHANDIGARH
221
                                                CRM-M-56603-2022
                                                Decided on : 22.12.2022

Baldev Singh @ Deba and others
                                                                  . . . Petitioners
                                    Versus
State of Punjab and others
                                                              . . . Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS BAHL
PRESENT: Ms. Varinder Kaur Waraich, Advocate
         for the petitioners.

             Mr. Amit Shukla, AAG, Punjab.


                                     ****
VIKAS BAHL, J. (Oral)

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

FIR No. 116 dated 30.11.2015 under Sections 323, 324, 452, 148 and

149 of the Indian Penal Code,1860 (Section 326 IPC added later on)

registered at Police Station Majitha, District Amritsar Rural (Annexure

P-1) and all subsequent proceedings arising on the basis of the

compromise.

On 06.12.2022, 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.116 dated 30.11.2015, registered under Sections 323, 324, 452, 148 and 149 IPC (Section 326 IPC has been added later on), at Police Station Majitha, District Amritsar Rural and all other consequential proceedings arising therefrom on

1 of 5

the basis of compromise.

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

Notice of motion for 22.12.2022.

The parties are directed to appear before the Illaqa Magistrate/trial Court for recording their statements qua compromise within a period of 12 days 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. "

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

by the Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Amritsar to the Registrar General

of this Court. The relevant portion of the said report is reproduced

hereinbelow:-

"5) The report is as under:-

i) As per the statement of the IO, there are three accused persons i.e. the present petitioners in the present case.

ii) As per the statement of the IO, none of the accused has been declared as proclaimed offender.

iii) After perusing the statements of the parties, this Court is satisfied that the compromise is genuine, voluntary and

2 of 5

out of free will of the parties.

xxx--xxx--xxx

(v) As per the statement of the 10, there is only one complainant namely Baldev Raj/respondent No. 2 in the present case.

Hence, the report is submitted."

Although, a perusal of the above report would show that as

per the said report, there is only one complainant but a perusal of the

statement annexed with the said report would show that the statement of

complainant Baldev Raj and Sunil Kumar @ Rinku, respondents No. 2

and 3, respectively have been recorded in support of the said

compromise and they have no objection in case the FIR is quashed. It is

further stated that the statement of the complainant(s)/victim(s) have

been made voluntarily without any fear, coercion or pressure.

Learned counsel for the petitioners has further submitted

that none of the petitioners were declared proclaimed offender in the

present case.

Learned counsel for the State, as per instructions, has stated

that the abovesaid fact is correct.

This Court has heard the learned counsel for the parties and

has perused the file. After perusing the report submitted by the trial

Court as well reply submitted on behalf of the State, this Court finds

that the matter has been amicably settled between the petitioners and the

complainants and the present FIR having been compromised deserves to

be quashed. Since the matter has been settled and the parties have

3 of 5

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 power viz; (i) to secure the ends of justice or (ii) to prevent abuse of the process of any Court. XXX---XXX"

4 of 5

In view of what has been discussed hereinabove, the

petition is allowed and FIR No. 116 dated 30.11.2015 under Sections

323, 324, 452, 148 and 149 of the Indian Penal Code,1860 (Section 326

IPC added later on) registered at Police Station Majitha, District

Amritsar Rural (Annexure P-1) and all subsequent proceedings arising

on the basis of the compromise, are ordered to be quashed, qua the

petitioners.

                                                      (VIKAS BAHL)
22.12.2022                                               JUDGE
Mehak
                       Whether reasoned/speaking?         Yes/No
    1.                 Whether reportable?                Yes/No




                                             5 of 5