Punjab-Haryana High Court
Pawan Kumar And Ors vs State Of Punjab And Ors on 23 March, 2022
CRM-M-9622-2022 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND
HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
247 (A)
CRM-M-9622-2022 (O&M)
Decided on : 23.03.2022
Pawan Kumar and others
. . . Petitioners
Versus
State of Punjab and others
. . . Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS BAHL
PRESENT: Mr. Vaibhav Sehgal, Advocate
for the petitioners.
Mr. Sukhbeer Singh, AAG, Punjab.
Mr. Sahil Parmar, Advocate for
Mr. Deepak Arora, Advocate
for respondent Nos. 2 to 4.
****
VIKAS BAHL, J. (Oral)
CRM-8297-2022
Allowed as prayed for.
Annexures P-1 to P-3 are taken on record subject to all just
exceptions.
Main Case:-
This is a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of
DDR No. 32 dated 14.09.2020 registered under Sections 323, 341, 506,
148 and 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 in FIR No. 206 dated
14.09.2020 under Sections 323, 341, 506, 148 and 149 of the Indian
Penal Code,1860 registered at Police Station Goraya, District Jalandhar
(Annexure P-1) and all subsequent proceedings arising on the basis of
1 of 6
the compromise.
When the matter came up before this Court on 09.03.2022,
the following order was passed:-
"This is a petition filed under Section 482 of
Cr.P.C. for quashing of DDR No.32 dated 14.09.2020
registered under Sections 323, 341, 506, 148, 149 of the
Indian Penal Code, 1860 in FIR No.206 dated
14.09.2020 registered under Sections 323, 341, 506, 148,
149 of IPC at Police Station Goraya, District Jalandhar
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.
Notice of motion for 23.03.2022.
On asking of the Court, Mr. Sarabjit S. Cheema,
AAG, Punjab appears and accepts notice on behalf of
the respondent-State and Mr. Deepak Arora, Advocate
appears on behalf of respondent Nos.2 to 4.
The parties are directed to appear before the
Illaqa Magistrate/trial Court for recording their
statements qua compromise within a period of one week.
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/affidavit 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
2 of 6
statement of the Investigating Officer as to how
many victims/complainants are there in the FIR.
To be heard alongwith CRM-M-1787-2022. "
In pursuance of the said order, a report has been submitted
by the Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Phillaur to the Registrar of this
Court. The relevant portion of the said report is reproduced
hereinbelow:-
"As desired, the report is as follows:
1. Seven persons namely Pawan Kumar,
Satnam Singh, Jatinder Kumar alias
Vickey, Sarabjit Singh alias Babbu,
Amarjit Kaur alias Piaro, Paramjit Kaur
alias Sweety and Rajwinder alias Bharind
are arrayed as accused in the present case.
2. No accused is proclaimed offender in the
present case.
3. From the statement of the parties i.e.
complainant/respondents Krishan Lal son
of Sarwan Kumar, Akash son of Krishan
Lal and Balbir Kaur wife of Krishan
Kumar and petitioners/accused Pawan
Kumar, Satnam Singh, Jatinder Kumar
alias Vickey, Sarabjit Singh alias Babbu,
Amarjit Kaur alias Piaro, Paramjit Kaur
alias Sweety and Rajwinder alias Bharind,
it appears to the Court that the
compromise is genuine, voluntary and the
same has been effected compromise
without any pressure, coercion, threat and
with the free consent of the parties.
4. As per statement of ASI Lavinder Singh No.
3 of 6
308 Jalandhar Rural now posted at Chowki
Dhuleta PS Goraya (Investigating Officer
of the present case, the accused persons are
not involved in any other FIR. 5. As per
Jalandhar Rural now posted at Chowki
Dhuleta PS Goraya (Investigating Officer
of the present case), in the present case
there are three victims/complainants
Krishan Lal son of Sarwan Kumar, Akash
son of Krishan Lal and Balbir Kaur wife of
Krishan Kumar.
The copies of the statement of the persons
named above (parties) and their identity proofs
are enclosed herewith for kind perusal of the
Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court.
Submitted please."
A perusal of the said report would show that it has been
stated that the statements of the complainant/respondents 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 statements of the
complainant/respondents have been made voluntarily without any fear,
coercion or pressure.
Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that none of
the petitioners were declared proclaimed offender in the present case and
are 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 Nos. 2 to 4 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 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.
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 DDR No. 32 dated 14.09.2020 registered under
Sections 323, 341, 506, 148 and 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 in
FIR No. 206 dated 14.09.2020 under Sections 323, 341, 506, 148 and
149 of the Indian Penal Code,1860 registered at Police Station Goraya,
District Jalandhar (Annexure P-1) and all subsequent proceedings
arising on the basis of the compromise, are ordered to be quashed, qua
the petitioners.
(VIKAS BAHL)
rd
March 23 , 2022 JUDGE
Mehak
Whether reasoned/speaking? Yes/No
Whether reportable? Yes/No
6 of 6
