Punjab-Haryana High Court
Rohit Kumar And Others vs State Of Punjab And Others on 7 February, 2022
CRM-M-650-2022 -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
(239)
CRM-M-650-2022
Date of decision: - 07.02.2022
Rohit Kumar and others
....Petitioners
Versus
State of Punjab and others
.....Respondents
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS BAHL
Present:- Mr. Amandeep Saini, Advocate,
for the petitioners.
Mr. Karanbir Singh, AAG, Punjab.
Mr. Ranbir Singh Sekhon, Advocate
for respondent Nos.2 to 5.
( Through Video Conferencing )
****
VIKAS BAHL, J. (ORAL)
This is a petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. for
quashing of FIR No.28 dated 17.03.2017 registered under Sections 323,
324, 506, 148, 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 at Police Station
Anandpur Sahib, District Rupnagar (Annexure P-1) and all the
subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise
dated 29.11.2021 (Annexure P-3).
On 10.01.2022, this Court was pleased to pass the following
1 of 6
order:-
"This is a petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. for
quashing of FIR No.28 dated 17.03.2017 registered under Sections
323, 324, 506, 148, 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 at Police
Station Anandpur Sahib, District Rupnagar (Annexure P-1) and all the
subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise
dated 29.11.2021 (Annexure P-3).
Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that all the
persons concerned are party to the compromise.
Notice of motion for 07.02.2022.
On asking of the Court, Mr. Sarabjit S. Cheema, AAG, Punjab,
appears and accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State.
The parties are directed to appear before the Illaqa
Magistrate/trial Court for recording their statements qua compromise
within a period of 15 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, the report has been submitted
by the Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Sri Anandpur Sahib to the Registrar
of this Court. The relevant part of the report is reproduced hereinbelow:-
"7. So, from the statements of the parties, Investigating Officer
as noted above and from the report of Ahlmad, the report is submitted
as follows: -
2 of 6
1. There are only six persons namely Rohit Kumar, Neeraj Kumar,
Jai Chand, Derwinder Singh @ Khalsa, Ramesh Kumar @
Laddi (i.e. petitioners before Hon'ble Punjab and Haryana
High Court) and Amandeep Singh @ Aman Walia (i.e.
respondent No.5 before Hon'ble Punjab and Haryana High
Court) arrayed as accused in the FIR and FIR also was
registered against four (4) unknown persons;
2. None of the accused is proclaimed offender nor any P.O.
proceedings are pending against any of the accused before this
Court;
3. The compromise appears to be genuine, voluntary and without
any coercion or undue influence.
4. The accused persons are not involved in any other FIR;
5. As per statement of Investigating Officer, present FIR was
lodged on the basis of statement of complainant Gurvinder
Singh and besides complainant Gurvinder Singh, there are two
more affected persons in the FIR namely Inderjit Singh and
Sukhwinder Singh i.e. father and brother of complainant who
have been arrayed as respondents No.2 to 4 before Hon'ble
Punjab and Haryana High Court in petition bearing CRM-M-
650 of 2022. Further that the challan in the present case was
presented against accused Amandeep Singh @ Aman (i.e.
respondent No.5 before Hon'ble Punjab and Haryana High
Court), Rohit Kumar, Darwinder Singh @ Khalsa, Ramesh
Kumar @ Laddi (i.e. petitioners No.1, 4 and 5. before Hon'ble
Punjab and Haryana High Court), however accused/petitioners
No.2 and 3 namely Neeraj Kumar and Jai Chand were declared
innocent as per statement of Investigating Officer as noted
above and their names were kept in column No.2 of challan and
further that none of the accused in the present case has been
declared proclaimed person/offender and as per record, the
aforesaid accused persons are not involved as accused in any
other offence/criminal case.
8. Report is submitted please.
Yours faithfully,
Raj Karan, PCS,
3 of 6
Judicial Magistrate Ist Class,
Sri Anandpur Sahib
UID No. PB00414"
A perusal of the said report would show that statements of
the concerned persons have been recorded in the case, who have stated
that the matter has been compromised and they have no objection in case
the FIR in question is quashed. They have further stated that the said
compromise is being entered into with there genuine, voluntary and
without any coercion or undue influence.
Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that there is
no other FIR against the petitioners and they have not been declared
proclaimed offenders. Learned counsel for the State, as per instructions,
has stated that this fact is correct.
Learned counsel for respondent Nos.2 to 5 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 parties.
This Court has heard the learned counsel for the parties and
has perused the file.
After perusing the report submitted by the learned trial Court,
this Court finds that the matter has been amicably settled between the
petitioners and the complainants. 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.
4 of 6
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 feel 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
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 what has been discussed hereinabove, this petition
is allowed and FIR No.28 dated 17.03.2017 registered under Sections
323, 324, 506, 148, 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 at Police Station
5 of 6
Anandpur Sahib, District Rupnagar (Annexure P-1) and all the
subsequent proceedings emanating therefrom are ordered to be quashed,
qua the petitioners.
( VIKAS BAHL )
February 07, 2022 JUDGE
naresh.k
Whether reasoned/speaking? Yes
Whether reportable? No
6 of 6
