Punjab-Haryana High Court
Prem Chand @ Bheema vs State Of Punjab And Another on 7 March, 2022
CRM-M-6586-2022 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
232
CRM-M-6586-2022
Decided on : 07.03.2022
Prem Chand @ Bheema
. . . Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab and another
. . . Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS BAHL
PRESENT: Mr. Saurav Bhatia, Advocate
for the petitioner.
Mr. Sarabjit S. Cheema, AAG, Punjab.
Mr. Khushkaran Kumar, Advocate
for respondent No. 2.
****
VIKAS BAHL, J. (Oral)
This is a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of
FIR No. 15 dated 11.02.2022 registered under Section 295-A of the Indian
Penal Code,1860 registered at Police Station Kathgarh, District Shaheed
Bhagat Singh Nagar (Nawanshahr) (Annexure P-1) and all subsequent
proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of the compromise.
When the matter came up before this Court on 15.02.2022,
the following order was passed:-
"This is a petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. for
quashing of FIR No.15 dated 11.02.2022 registered under
Section 295-A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 at Police Station
Kathgarh, District Shaheed Bhagat Singh Nagar (Nawanshahr)
(Annexure P-1) and all the subsequent proceedings arising
therefrom on the basis of compromise.
1 of 5
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that all
the persons concerned are party to the compromise.
Notice of motion for 07.03.2022.
On asking of the Court, Mr. Saurav Khurana, Deputy
Advocate General, Punjab appears and accepts notice on
behalf of the respondent-State and Mr. Khushkaran Kumar,
Advocate appears on behalf of respondent No.2.
Learned counsel for respondent No.2 has submitted that
the matter has been compromised and he has no objection, in
case, the FIR and all the subsequent proceedings arising
therefrom on the basis of compromise are quashed qua the
petitioner.
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, a report has been submitted by
the Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Balachaur to the Registrar
(General) of this Court. The relevant portion of the said report is
reproduced hereinbelow:-
"It is submitted that in this case FIR was registered on
2 of 5
the statement of complainant Jagjit Singh on 11.02.2022 under
Sections 295-A of IPC at P.S. Kathgarh, District SBS Nagar.
However, with the intervention of the respectable persons a
compromise was effected between complainant Jagjit Singh and
accused Prem Chand @ bheema as per his statement suffered
before the court. Statements of the complainant Jagjit Singh
and accused Prem Chand @ Bheema have been recorded
separately regarding the compromise. Investigation officer of
this case present and suffered a statement that the above said
FIR was registered on the statement of only complainant Jagjit
Singh against accused Prem Chand @ Bheema. Complainant is
the only victim in the present FIR. Neither accused was
declared P.O. in this case and nor any P.O. proceeding is
pending against accused and there is no other FIR registered
against the accused.
As per the statements so got recorded by both sides, it
reveals that the compromise amongst the complainant Jagjit
Singh and accused Prem Chand @ Bheema is genuine,
voluntary, without any coercion and without any undue
influence and the same has been effected with the free will and
consent of the parties. Complainant and accused Jaswinder
Singh Sian have been identified by their respective counsel.
It is further submitted that statements of both parties,
copy of compromise Annexure C-1 and statement of IO. is being
sent along with this report for your honour's kind perusal.
Submitted please."
A perusal of the said 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 both 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
3 of 5
voluntarily without any fear, coercion or pressure.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the
petitioner was not declared proclaimed offender in the present case and is
not involved in any other case.
Learned counsel for the State, as per instructions, has stated
that these facts are correct.
Learned counsel for respondent No. 2-complainant has
reiterated the factum of compromise and has prayed for quashing of FIR
on the basis of the same.
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
petitioner 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
4 of 5
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, the petition
is allowed and FIR No. 15 dated 11.02.2022 registered under Section 295-
A of the Indian Penal Code,1860 registered at Police Station Kathgarh,
District Shaheed Bhagat Singh Nagar (Nawanshahr) (Annexure P-1) and
all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of the
compromise, are ordered to be quashed, qua the petitioner.
(VIKAS BAHL)
JUDGE
March 7th, 2022
Mehak
Whether reasoned/speaking? Yes/No
Whether reportable? Yes/No
5 of 5
