Punjab-Haryana High Court
Gobinder Singh vs State Of Punjab And Another on 22 March, 2022
CRM-M-11324-2021 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
276
CRM-M-11324-2022
Decided on : 22.03.2022
Gobinder Singh
. . . Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab and another
. . . Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS BAHL
PRESENT: Mr. Peeush Gagneja, Advocate
for the petitioner.
Mr. Sarabjit S. Cheema, AAG, Punjab.
Mr. Harpal Singh, Advocate
for respondent No. 2.
(Through Video Conferencing)
****
VIKAS BAHL, J. (Oral)
This is a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of
FIR No. 251 dated 09.11.2020 under Sections 279, 337 and 427 of the
Indian Penal Code,1860 registered at Police Station City Kharar, Tehsil
Kharar, District SAS Nagar, Mohali (Annexure P-1) and all subsequent
proceedings arising on the basis of the compromise.
When the matter came up before a Coordinate Bench of
this Court on 12.03.2021, the following order was passed:-
"Case heard by video conferencing.
By this petition, the petitioner seeks quashing of
FIR No.0251, dated 09.11.2020, registered at Police
1 of 6
Station City Kharar, District SAS Nagar, alleging
therein the commission of offences punishable under
the provisions of Sections 279/337/427 of the IPC, as
also all other subsequent proceedings arising
therefrom, on the basis of a compromise (Annexure P-)
, arrived at between the petitioner and respondent
no.2.
Notice of motion be issued to the respondents.
Mr. Sandeep Singh, DAG, Punjab, accepts
notice at the asking of the court on behalf of the
respondent State, with Mr. Harpal Singh, Advocate,
appearing for respondent no.2 and accepting notice.
He will file a power of attorney duly executed by
respondent no.2 in his favour, well before the next date
of hearing.
A copy of the petition be e-mailed to them today
itself by learned counsel for the petitioner.
Adjourned to 24.05.2021.
In the meanwhile, the petitioner, as also
respondent no.2, would appear before the learned
Area Magistrate/trial Court (as the case may be) up to
21.04.2021, to record their statements. That Court
would satisfy itself with regard to the authenticity of
the compromise and the fact that it has been arrived at
without any kind of undue influence or pressure, and
would thereafter send its report to this Court, before
the next date of hearing.
That Court would also verify whether there is
any other person involved in the occurrence, who is
not a party to the present petition and whose consent
for the compromise would be required, if this Court
comes to the conclusion that the FIR sought to be
quashed can be so quashed.
2 of 6
The learned State counsel would also verify
whether there are any other criminal cases, of like
nature or otherwise, pending against the petitioner.
March 12, 2021 (AMOL RATTAN SINGH)
dharamvir JUDGE"
In pursuance of the said order, a report has been submitted
by the Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Kharar to the Registrar
(General) of this Court. The relevant portion of the said report is
reproduced hereinbelow:-
"In compliance with the aforesaid order,
parties appeared on 12.04.2021 and
complainant Parshotam Singh got recorded his
statement stating that the FIR has been
registered on the basis of his statement against
accused namely Gobinder Singh. Now, with the
intervention of respectables, he has
compromised the matter with the accused. The
said compromise is without any threat, force
and coercion. He has no objection if the present
FIR alongwith other consequential proceedings
be quashed against the above said accused.
Similarly, petitioner-accused Gobinder
Singh has got recorded his statement to the
effect that the matter has been compromised.
The said compromise is without any threat,
force, coercion. The said FIR alongwith other
consequential proceedings may kindly be
quashed against them.
ASI Lakhwinder Singh got recorded his
3 of 6
statement to the effect that the FIR No.251 dated
09.11.2020, under Sections 279, 337, 427 IPC,
PS. City Kharar, District SAS Nagar has been
registered against unknown person and the case
had been registered on the basis of vehicle
number. He stated that the accused is yet to join
the investigation. He further stated that
compromise has been effected between the
parties. This Court is satisfied that aforesaid
statements made by complainant and accused
are voluntarily and without any threat or any
undue influence. Report is hereby sent to your
good-self office along with copies of statements
of complainant and accused as required in
compliance to the order of Hon'ble High Court.
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 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.
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.
5 of 6
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. 251 dated 09.11.2020 under Sections
279, 337 and 427 of the Indian Penal Code,1860 registered at Police
Station City Kharar, Tehsil Kharar, District SAS Nagar, Mohali
(Annexure P-1) and all subsequent proceedings arising on the basis of
the compromise, are ordered to be quashed, qua the petitioner.
(VIKAS BAHL)
JUDGE
March 22nd, 2022
Mehak
Whether reasoned/speaking? Yes/No
Whether reportable? Yes/No
6 of 6
