Punjab-Haryana High Court
Arum Kumar And Another vs State Of Haryana And Another on 26 July, 2022
CRM-M-19850-2019 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-19850-2019
Date of decision : 26.07.2022
Arun Kumar and another ... Petitioners
Versus
State of Haryana and another ... Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS BAHL
Present: Mr. Abhilaksh Grover,Advocate
for the petitioners.
Mr. Anmol Malik, AAG, Haryana.
Mr. Sanpreet Sandhu, Advocate
for the respondent No.2.
VIKAS BAHT, J.(ORAL)
This is a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. praying for
quashing of FIR No.712, dated 04.12.2018 (Annexure P-1) under Section
379-A of IPC, 1860 registered at Police Station City Yamuna Nagar,
District Yamuna Nagar and all other consequential proceedings arising
therefrom on the basis of compromise dated 24.04.2019 (Annexure P-2).
On 02.05.2019, a coordinate Bench of this Court was pleased to
pass the following order:-
"Learned counsel for the petitioners refers to Annexure P-2 to
contend that a compromise has been effected between the parties and
prays for quashing of FIR No.712 dated 04.12.2018 (Annexure P-1)
under Sections 379-A of Indian Penal Code registered at Police Station
City Yamuna Nagar, District Yamuna Nagar on the basis of
compromise dated 24.04.2019 (Annexure P-2).
Notice of motion for 24.07.2019.
Mr. Sanpreet Sandhu, Advocate causes representation on behalf
of respondent No.2 and admits the factum of compromise.
Accordingly, the private parties are directed to appear before the trial
MANPREET SINGH
2022.07.27 11:06 Court/Illaqa Magistrate on 15.05.2019 for recording their statements
| attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this order/judgment
CRM-M-19850-2019 2
with regard to compromise/settlement. Trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate 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 case
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.
A copy of the report be also sent through fax to the Registrar
Judicial of this Court.
(MANOJ BAJAJ)
JUDGE"
In pursuance to the said order, a report has been submitted by
the District and Sessions Judge, Yamuna Nagar. The relevant portion of the
said report is reproduced hereinbelow:-
"My point wise report is as under :-
i) Number of persons arrayed as accused in FIR ?
It is submitted that only two persons, namely, Arun Kumar alias
Bunty and Sunil Kumar have been arrayed as accused in the present
case FIR No.712 dated 04.12.2018 under Section 379-A IPC registered
at Police Station City Yamuna Nagar.
ii) Whether any accused is proclaimed offender ?
None of the accused has been declared 'proclaimed person' in
the present case.
iii) Whether the compromise is genuine, voluntary and without
any coercion or undue influence ?
It is submitted that complainant Pardeep Kumar as well as
accused Arun Kumar alias Bunty and Sunil Kumar have appeared
before this Court and they have made above mentioned statements
regarding the compromise arrived at between them.
After hearing the par;ties and going through the statements
made by them, this Court is of the view that the parties have arrived at
an amicable settlement and the compromise is without any pressure or
MANPREET SINGH coercion. Original statements made by the parties before this Court are
| attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this order/judgment
CRM-M-19850-2019 3
annexed herewith for kind perusal.
iv) Whether the accused persons are involved in any other case
or not ?
As per the statement made by the Inspector/SHO of Police
Station City Yamuna Nagar, accused Sunil Kumar is involved in five
criminal cases mentioned in the report/list Mark-A, whereas accused
Arun Kumar alias Bunty is involved only in the present case as
mentioned in the report/list Mark-B. Original lists Mark-A and Mark-B
submitted by the SHO of concerned Police Station are annexed herewith
for kind perusal.
v) The trial Court is also directed to record the statement of the
Investigation Officer as to how many victims/complainants are there in
the FIR ?
It is submitted that the investigating officer, namely, ASI Nar
Singh was summoned and his above mentioned statement has been
recorded. As per the statement and after going through the case file, it
is submitted that Pardeep Kumar son of Ram Naresh, resident of village
Shadipur, District Yamuna Nagar, is the only victim/complainant in the
present case Fir No.712 of 2018. Original statement of the investigating
officer is annexed herewith for kind perusal.
The report is submitted for kind perusal.
Yours faithfully,
District and Sessions Judge,
Yamuna Nagar"
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 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
MANPREET SINGH tWO parties.
2022.07.27 11:06
| attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this order/judgment
MANPREET SINGH
2022.07.27 11:06
CRM-M-19850-2019 4
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
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
summarized 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."
| attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this order/judgment
CRM-M-19850-2019 5
In view of what has been discussed hereinabove, this petition is
allowed and FIR No.712, dated 04.12.2018 (Annexure P-1) under Section
379-A of IPC, 1860 registered at Police Station City Yamuna Nagar,
District Yamuna Nagar and all other subsequent proceedings emanating
therefrom are ordered to be quashed, qua the petitioners.
(VIKAS BAHL)
JUDGE
July 26, 2022
Manpreet
Whether speaking / reasoned Yes/No
Whether reportable Yes/No
MANPREET SINGH
2022.07.27 11:06
| attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this order/judgment
