Rishi Pal Sood And Others vs State Of Punjab And Another
2022 Latest Caselaw 17656 P&H

122
           IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                          AT CHANDIGARH


                                        CRM-M-57434-2022
                                        DECIDED ON: 23.12.2022

RISHI PAL SOOD AND OTHERS
                                                      .....PETITIONERS

                                  VERSUS


STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER
                                                      .....RESPONDENTS


CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MOUDGIL.

Present:    None for the petitioners.

            Mr. Rajiv Verma, DAG, Punjab.

            None for respondent No.2.

            ****

SANDEEP MOUDGIL, J (ORAL)

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

Complaint No.COMI/583/2019, dated 01.08.2019 (Annexure P-1), titled as

'Gaurav Malhotra Versus Rishi Pal Sood and others' as well as the order

dated 04.10.2019 (Annexure P-2) passed by the Court of learned Judicial

Magistrate 1st Class, Ludhiana, vide which FIR has been directed to be

registered against petitioners, on the basis of compromise dated 11.11.2022

(Annexure P-6).

During the pendency of the dispute, the parties have

compromised the matter and filed the present petition for quashing of FIR.

Vide order dated 12.12.2022, parties were directed to appear

before the Illaqa Magistrate/Trial Court and report with regard to the

1 of 3

genuineness of the compromise was called for.

The report dated 20.12.2022, has been received from learned

Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Ludhiana, stating that the parties have entered

into a compromise, which is genuine, voluntary and without any coercion or

undue influence. There is no representation on behalf of respondent No.2,

which shows that he has no objection to the quashing of the FIR.

Full Bench of this Court in Kulwinder Singh and others vs.

State of Punjab, 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052, has held:-

"The only inevitable conclusion from the above discussion is that there is no statutory bar under the Cr.P.C. which can affect the inherent power of this Court under Section 482. Further, the same cannot be limited to matrimonial cases alone and the Court has the wide power to quash the proceedings even in noncompoundable offences notwithstanding the bar under Section 320 of the Cr.P.C., in order to prevent the abuse of law and to secure the ends of justice.

The power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. is to be exercised Ex-Debitia Justitia to prevent an abuse of process of Court. There can neither be an exhaustive list nor the defined para-meters to enable a High Court to invoke or exercise its inherent powers. It will always depend upon the facts and circumstances of each case. The power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. has no limits. However, the High Court will exercise it sparingly and with utmost care and caution. The exercise of power has to be with circumspection and restraint. The Court is a vital and an extra-ordinary effective instrument to maintain and control social order. The Courts play role of paramount importance in achieving peace, harmony and ever- lasting congeniality in society. Resolution of a dispute by way of a compromise between two warring groups, therefore, should

2 of 3

attract the immediate and prompt attention of a Court which should endeavour to give full effect to the same unless such compromise is abhorrent to lawful composition of the society or would promote savagery."

The legal principles as laid down for quashing of the judgment

were also approved by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of 'Gian

Singh Versus State of Punjab and another,(2012) 10 SCC 303'.

Furthermore, the broad principles for exercising the powers under Section

482 were summarized by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of

'Parbatbhai Aahir @ Parbatbhai Bhimsinhbhai Karmur and others versus

State of Gujarat and another" (2017) 9 SCC 641'.

It is evident that in view of the amicable resolution of the issues

amongst the parties, no useful purpose would be served by continuation of

the proceedings. The furtherance of the proceedings is likely to be a waste of

judicial time and there appears to be no chances of conviction.

In view of the above, Complaint No.COMI/583/2019, dated

01.08.2019 (Annexure P-1) titled as 'Gaurav Malhotra Versus Rishi Pal

Sood and others' as well as the order dated 04.10.2019 (Annexure P-2),

passed by the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Ludhiana, are

quashed qua the petitioners, on the basis of compromise dated 11.11.2022

(Annexure P-6).

The present petition is hereby allowed.

                                                (SANDEEP MOUDGIL)
23.12.2022                                            JUDGE
Poonam Negi

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

                                       3 of 3