Punjab-Haryana High Court
Krishan @ Krishan Kumar And Ors vs State Of Haryana And Another on 31 May, 2022
CRM-M-16130-2022 -1-
274
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-16130-2022
Date of decision : 31.05.2022
Krishan @ Krishan Kumar and others
...Petitioners
Versus
State of Haryana and another
...Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS BAHL
Present: Mr. Himanshu Gupta, Advocate for the petitioners.
Mr. Viney Phogat, DAG, Haryana.
Mr. Yaseen Sethi, Advocate for respondent No.2.
****
VIKAS BAHL, J. (ORAL)
This is a petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing
of FIR No.0005 dated 09.01.2017 registered under Sections 323, 324, 34,
506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 at Police Station Dhand, District Kaithal
(Annexure P-1) and all the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the
basis of compromise.
On 21.04.2022, this Court had passed the following order:-
"This is a petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for
quashing of FIR No.0005 dated 09.01.2017 registered under
Sections 323, 324, 34, 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860
at Police Station Dhand, District Kaithal (Annexure P-1)
and all the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the
basis of compromise.
1 of 6
Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that
all the persons concerned are party to the compromise.
Notice of motion for 31.05.2022.
On asking of the Court, Mr. Munish Sharma, AAG,
Haryana appears and accepts notice on behalf of the
respondent-State and Mr. Yaseen Sethi, 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 one month.
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 abovesaid order, a report has been
submitted by the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Kaithal. The relevant portion
of the said report is reproduced hereinbelow:-
"On the basis of the report of Station House Officer
concerned and on the basis of statement of concerned
Investigating Officer namely HC Rajeev Kumar and
statement of Additional Station House Officer namely Shri
Ram Lal, got recorded before the court, the following report
is being sent as under:
(A) The present FIR has been registered on the complaint
2 of 6
moved to the police by complainant Sunil Kumar son of
Mahender Singh against four persons namely Balbir son of
Ram Chander, Shubham @ Shubham Kumar son of Balbir
Singh, Sahil @ Sahil Kumar son of Balbir Singh and
Krishan @ Krishan Kumar son of Ram Chander. After
investigation, challan has been submitted before the court
against all the above-stated four accused namely Balbir,
Shubham @Shubham Kumar, Sahil @ Sahil Kumar and
Krishan @ Krishan Kumar.
(B) No accused has been declared proclaimed offender.
(C) Following criminal cases were registered against
accused Balbir:
1. FIR No.39 dated 14.04.2013, under Sections
120-B, 148, 149, 186, 307, 323, 332, 353 and 452 of
Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 3 of SC/ST Act,
registered at Police Station Dhand, District Kaithal,
wherein accused Balbir has been acquitted as per the
order dated 02.09.2013 passed by Shri J.S. Sidhu, the
then learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kaithal.
2. FIR No.55 dated 15.05.2013, under Sections
120-B, 307 and 323, read with Section 34 of Indian
Penal Code, 1860 and Section 3 of SC/ST Act,
registered at Police Station Dhand, District Kaithal,
wherein accused has been acquitted as per order
dated 25.10.2013 passed by Shri Rajan Walia, the
then learned Additional Sessions. Judge, Kaithal.
(D) No criminal case has been registered against other
three accused persons namely Shubham @ Shubham
Kumar, Sahil @ Sahil Kumar and Krishan @ Krishan
Kumar.
(E) As per the report received from Station House Officer
concerned and statements of the police officials i.e.
Investigating Officer HC Rajeev Kumar and Shri Ram Lal,
3 of 6
Additional Station House Officer, Police Station Dhand and
as per the record available with this court, there is only one
victim/complainant namely Sunil Kumar son of Mahender
Singh.
Thus report submitted, please.
Thanking you,
Yours Sincerely,
Sd/- (Anita Rani)
Judicial Magistrate First Class,
Kaithal, U.I.D.No.:HR-0460"
A perusal of the said report would show that the compromise
has been found to be genuine, without any pressure or undue influence. 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 petitioners has submitted that the
petitioners were not declared proclaimed offender in the present case.
Learned counsel for the State, as per instructions has stated that this fact is
correct.
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
two parties.
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
4 of 6
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", reported as 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", reported as 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 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
5 of 6
abuse of the process of any Court. XXX---XXX"
In view of what has been discussed hereinabove, the petition is
allowed and FIR No.0005 dated 09.01.2017 registered under Sections 323,
324, 34, 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 at Police Station Dhand,
District Kaithal (Annexure P-1) and all the subsequent proceedings arising
therefrom on the basis of compromise, are ordered to be quashed, qua the
petitioners.
All the pending miscellaneous applications, if any, stand
disposed of in view of the abovesaid judgment.
31.05.2022 (VIKAS BAHL)
Pawan JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes/No
Whether reportable:- Yes/No
6 of 6
