Punjab-Haryana High Court
Gurpreet Singh vs State Of Punjab And Another on 7 March, 2022
CRM-M-10970-2020 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
226
CRM-M-10970-2020
Decided on : 07.03.2022
Gurpreet Singh
. . . Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab and another
. . . Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS BAHL
PRESENT: Mr. Munish Puri, Advocate
for the petitioner.
Mr. Sarabjit S. Cheema, AAG, Punjab.
Ms. Deepti Rampal, Advocate and
Mr. Manjeet Singh, Advocate
for respondent Nos. 2.
****
VIKAS BAHL, J. (Oral)
This is a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of
FIR No. 54 dated 07.11.2018 registered under Sections 279,337, 338 and
427 of the Indian Penal Code,1860 registered at Police Station Sadar,
District Pathankot (Annexure P-1) and all subsequent proceedings arising
therefrom on the basis of the compromise.
When the matter came up before this Court on 07.02.2022,
the following order was passed:-
"CRM-941-2022
This is an application filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C.
for preponement of the date of hearing in the main case from
22.07.2022 to an early date.
Notice in the application.
1 of 6
On advance notice, Mr. Sarabjit S. Cheema, AAG,
Punjab, appears and accepts notice on behalf of the non-
applicant/State of Punjab and Ms. Deepali Rampal, Advocate
appears on behalf of respondent No.2 and have submitted that
they have no objection in case the present application is
allowed and the date of hearing in the main case is preponed
from 22.07.2022 to today.
In view of the aforesaid facts and no objection from the
opposite side, the present application is allowed and the date of
hearing in the main case is preponed from 22.07.2022 to today.
Main case
This is a petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. for
quashing of FIR No.54 dated 07.11.2018 registered under
Sections 279/337/338/427 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 at
Police Station Sadar, District Pathankot (Annexure P-1) and all
the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of
compromise (Annexure P-2).
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. Sarabjit S. Cheema, AAG,
Punjab appears and accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-
State and Ms. Deepali Rampal, 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 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?
2 of 6
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 Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Pathankot to the Registrar (General) of
this Court. The relevant portion of the said report is reproduced
hereinbelow:-
"After going through the statements and the file, I am
satisfied that both the parties have got recorded their
statements voluntarily with regard to the compromise. The
parties got recorded their statements voluntarily and out of free
will with regard to the compromise.
1. Apart from genuineness of compromise the Hon'ble High
Court has sought information on certain points which are as
below:
(i). Number of persons arrayed as accused?
Ans. As per statement of Investigating Officer ASI Rajesh
Kumar No.1313/Ptk, as well as report under Section 173
Cr.P.C, there is only one accused namely Gurpreet Singh is
involved in the present FIR.
(ii) Whether any accused is proclaimed offender?
Ans. As per statement of Investigating Officer ASI Rajesh
Kumar No.1313/Ptk, as well as report under Section 173
Cr.P.C, no accused has been declared proclaimed offender in
the present FIR.
(iii). Whether compromise is genuine, voluntary and without
any coercion or undue influence?.
Ans. Both the parties have got recorded their statements
3 of 6
voluntarily and without any coercion or undue influence with
regard to the compromise.
(iv) Whether the accused persons are involved in any other
FIR or not?
Ans. As per statement of Investigating Officer ASI Rajesh
Kumar No.1313/Ptk, as well as report under Section 173
Cr.P.C, except the present FIR no accused persons are involved
in any other case.
(v). How many victims/complainant are there in the FIR?
Ans. As per statement of Investigating Officer Officer ASI
Rajesh Kumar No.1313/Ptk, as well as report under Section
173 Cr.P.C, except the victim/complainant Ranjit Singh, no
other victim/complainant in the present FIR.
Statements of complainant as well as accused are
attached herewith.
This is for your 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
voluntarily without any fear, coercion or pressure.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the
petitioner was never 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.
4 of 6
Learned counsel for respondent No. 2 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
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
5 of 6
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. 54 dated 07.11.2018 registered under Sections
279,337, 338 and 427 of the Indian Penal Code,1860 registered at Police
Station Sadar, District Pathankot (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
6 of 6
