Mukesh Chawla Alias Mani And Ors vs State Of Punjab And Another
2022 Latest Caselaw 7262 P&H

CRM-M-23473-2022                                                             1

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

CRM-M-23473-2022 Date of decision : 20.07.2022

Mukesh Chawla @ Mani and others

... Petitioners

Versus

State of Punjab and another

... Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS BAHL

Present: Mr.Ramnish Puri, Advocate for the petitioners.

Mr.Sarabjit Singh Cheema, AAG, Punjab.

Mr.Amit Khari, Advocate for respondent no.2.

VIKAS BAHL, J.(ORAL)

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

quashing of FIR no.100 dated 21.04.2022 registered under Sections 336,

506, 34 IPC and Sections 25 & 27 of the Arms Act at Police Station Sadar

Amritsar, District Amritsar and all other consequential proceedings arising

therefrom on the basis of compromise.

On 26.05.2022, 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.100 dated 21.04.2022 registered under Sections 336, 506, 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act, 1959 at Police Station Sadar Amritsar, District Amritsar 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 20.07.2022. On asking of the Court, Mr. Sarabjit S. Cheema, AAG, Punjab appears and accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State and Mr. Amit Khari, 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 six weeks.

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.

26.05.2022"

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

the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Amritsar. The relevant portion of

the said report is reproduced hereinbelow:-

" That following is the requisite information, as directed:

1. That as per statements of 1O ASI Amar Singh, complainant Rajbeer Singh alias Rajbir Singh and as per record, four persons, named above, are arrayed as accused in the present FIR.

2. Tnat as per statement of IO ASI Amar Singh, none of the accused was ever declared Proclaimed offender.

3. That the compromise effected between complainant/aggrieved and accused persons is genuine, voluntary, out of free will and without any coercion or undue influence.

4. As per statement of IO ASI Amar Singh, there is no other FIR registered against any of the accused in Police Station Sadar, Amritsar.

5. That as per statement of investigating officer ASI Amar Singh, Rajbeer Singh alias Rajbir Singh is the only victim/complainant in the present FIR.

2 of 4

Submitted please.

(Jaapinder Singh), Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Amritsar"

A perusal of the above said report would show that the

petitioners and respondent no.2 have appeared and have 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 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."

Keeping in view of the above said facts and circumstances, this

petition is allowed and FIR no.100 dated 21.04.2022 registered under

Sections 336, 506, 34 IPC and Sections 25 & 27 of the Arms Act at Police

Station Sadar Amritsar, District Amritsar and all the subsequent

proceedings emanating therefrom are ordered to be quashed, qua the

petitioners.

                                                         (VIKAS BAHL)
July 20, 2022.                                              JUDGE
Davinder Kumar


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



                                      4 of 4