Punjab-Haryana High Court
Shivani Verma And Ors vs State Of Punjab And Ors on 23 December, 2022
CRM-M-38404-2022 (O&M) 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
218
CRM-M-38404-2022(O&M)
Decided on : 23.12.2022
Shivani Verma and others
. . . Petitioners
Versus
State of Punjab and others
. . . Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS BAHL
PRESENT: Mr. Varinder Singh, Advocate for
Mr. Nakul Sharma, Advocate
for the petitioners.
Mr. Amit Shukla, AAG, Punjab.
Mr. Om Malhan, Advocate for
Mr. Hukam Singh, Advocate
for respondents No. 2 and 3.
****
VIKAS BAHL, J. (Oral)
This is a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of
FIR No. 92 dated 22.05.2022 under Sections 452, 323 and 34 of the
Indian Penal Code,1860 registered at Police Station Bhargo Camp
Jalandhar, District Jalandhar (Annexure P-1) and all subsequent
proceedings arising on the basis of the compromise.
On 02.12.2022, 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.92 dated 22.05.2022
registered under Sections 452, 323, 34 IPC at Police
Station Bhargo Camp Jalandhar, District Jalandhar and
1 of 6
all other consequential proceedings arising therefrom on
the basis of compromise.
Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted
that petitioner no.4 Munish Sharma is also known as
Sunny and all the persons concerned are party to the
compromise.
Notice of motion for 14.12.2022.
On the asking of the Court, Mr.Tarun Aggarwal,
Sr.DAG, Punjab, accepts notice on behalf of respondent
no.1. Mr.Hardeep Singh, Advocate for Mr.Hukam Singh,
Advocate, appears on behalf of respondent nos.2 and 3
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 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. "
In pursuance of the said order, a report has been submitted
by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jalandhar to the Registrar General of
this Court. The relevant portion of the said report is reproduced
hereinbelow:-
"8. Therefore as per the statement of the parties, a preliminary
2 of 6
report is submitted as under:-
a) That the FIR has been registered against four accused
namely Komal Verma, Munish Sharma, Shivani Verma and
Rahul Verma on the complaint of complainant Gagan Verma.
b) That apart from the complainant Gagan Verma, there is one
more victim/complainant namely Gulshan Rani in the present
case.
c) That as per the statement of the complainant party and the
statement of the accused, the compromise is genuine, voluntary,
without any threat or coercion and out of free will of the
parties.
d) That as per the statement of the accused Munish Sharma.
besides the present FIR one more FIR bearing no.111 dated
16.04.2022 U/s 451, 506, 323, 34 IPC has been registered at
PS Division No.8, Jalandhar against him.
e) That as per the statement of the parties none of the accused
has been declared as a proclaimed offender."
The abovesaid report dated 13.12.2022 has been submitted
by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, (NRI Court), Jalandhar, and is a
preliminary report on account of the fact that the statement of
Investigating Officer could not be recorded as he was on medical leave
and subsequent to the same, a supplementary report dated 14.12.2021
was recorded after recording the statement of the Investigating Officer
and the relevant portion of the said report is reproduced hereinbelow:-
"2. It is submitted that the statement of the Investigating
Officer/ASI Ashok Kumar No.87, PS Bhargo Camp, Jalandhar
has been recorded. As per the statement so suffered by him the
supplementary report is submitted as under:-
3 of 6
a) That the FIR has been registered against four accused
namely Komal Verma, Munish Sharma, Shivani Verma and
Rahul Verma on the complaint of complainant Gagan Verma.
b) That apart from the complainant Gagan Verma, there is one
more victim/complainant namely Gulshan Rani in the present
case.
c) That as per the statement of the Investigating Officer, besides
the present FIR one more FIR bearing no.111 dated 16.04.2022
U/s 451, 506, 323, 34 IPC has been registered at PS Division
No.8, Jalandhar against accused Munish Sharma.
d) That as per the statement of the Investigating Officer none of
the accused has been declared as a proclaimed offender.
The supplementary report is submitted for kind perusal
and further necessary action. It is submitted that the
supplementary report is also being sent through email."
A perusal of the above report would show that it has been
stated that the statements of the complainant as well as the accused have
been recorded in the case and they have stated that the matter has been
compromised and they have no objection in case the FIR is quashed. It
is further stated that the statement of the complainant has 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.
Learned counsel for respondents No. 2 and 3 has again
4 of 6
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 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
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.
5 of 6
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, the
petition is allowed and FIR No. 92 dated 22.05.2022 under Sections
452, 323 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code,1860 registered at Police
Station Bhargo Camp Jalandhar, District Jalandhar (Annexure P-1) and
all subsequent proceedings arising on the basis of the compromise, are
ordered to be quashed, qua the petitioners.
Pending miscellaneous application, if any, shall stand
disposed of.
(VIKAS BAHL)
23.12.2022 JUDGE
Mehak
Whether reasoned/speaking? Yes/No
Whether reportable? Yes/No
6 of 6
