Punjab-Haryana High Court
Jyoti Devi And Others vs State Of Punjab And Others on 1 November, 2022
CRM-M-6735-2022(O&M) -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-6735-2022(O&M)
Date of decision : 01.11.2022
Jyoti Devi and others
...Petitioners
Versus
State of Punjab and others
...Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS BAHL
Present: None.
****
VIKAS BAHL, J. (ORAL)
CRM-40897-2022
This is an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for
preponment of date already fixed in the present case i.e., 14.12.2022.
A perusal of the application would show that it has been stated
that the matter has been compromised and the report of the Judicial
Magistrate Ist Class, Pathankot in pursuance of the order passed by this
Court in respect to the compromise, has already been received.
In view of the same, the application is allowed and the main
case is preponed from 14.12.2022 to today itself. The same is taken up on
board for hearing today.
CRM-M-6735-2022
This is a petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. for quashing of
FIR No.116 dated 31.05.2020 registered under Sections 452, 323, 506, 188,
1 of 4
CRM-M-6735-2022(O&M) -2-
427, 148, 149 IPC at Police Station Division 2, District Pathankot, and all
the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise.
On 17.02.2022, a Coordinate Bench of this Court was pleased
to pass the following order:-
"By filing this petition, quashing of FIR No.116 dated
31.05.2020 under Sections 452,323,506,188,427,148,149 IPC
registered at P.S Division No.2, District Pathankot and all other
consequent proceedings arising therefrom has been sought on the basis
of compromise.
Notice of motion.
Mr. V.G. Jauhar, Sr. DAG Punjab accepts notice on behalf of
respondent No.1-State.
Parties may appear before concerned Illaqa/Duty Magistrate
on 24.02.2022 or on any other date convenient to Illaqa/Duty
Magistrate and get their statements recorded with regard to the
compromise. The original compromise shall be produced before
Illaqa/Duty Magistrate. In the event of their statements being recorded,
Illaqa/Duty Magistrate will send copies of the same to this Court
before the next date of hearing along with his report:
i) regarding genuineness and voluntary nature of the compromise;
ii) whether all the accused/petitioners are appearing before the Court
or are on bail; and
iii)whether any other proceeding is pending against the
accused/petitioners.
Adjourned to 09.05.2022.
February 17, 2022 (Harinder Singh Sidhu)
Judge "
In pursuance of the abovesaid order, a report has been
submitted by the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Pathankot. The relevant
portion of the said report is reproduced hereinbelow:-
"It is submitted that:
i) The parties got recorded their statements voluntarily and out
of free will with regard to the compromise.
(ii) There are only nine accused/petitioners i.e. Jyoti Devi,
2 of 4
CRM-M-6735-2022(O&M) -3-
Pawan Kumar, Nirmala Devi, Narinder Kumar @ Tinku, Sonu
@ Rakesh Kumar, Shubham, Ajay Kumar, Kiran Bala and
Santosh Rani @ Popy arrayed in the petition before Hon'ble
High Court. It is further submitted that only accused Ajay
Kumar is on bail and the challan in the present case is yet to be
presented.
iii) As per the statement of the accused/petitioners no other
proceeding is pending against them.
iv) Original of compromise is produced, seen and returned and
copy is also placed on record, to which questions are asked to
all parties/ persons present in Court, who are stating that they
belong to same caste/community and matter is now amicably
resolved between them.
Statements of complainant as well as accused are attached
herewith."
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.
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", 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
3 of 4
CRM-M-6735-2022(O&M) -4-
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 abuse of the process of
any Court. XXX---XXX"
In view of what has been discussed hereinabove, the petition is
allowed and FIR No.116 dated 31.05.2020 registered under Sections 452,
323, 506, 188, 427, 148, 149 IPC at Police Station Division 2, District
Pathankot, and all the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis
of compromise, are ordered to be quashed, qua the petitioners.
01.11.2022 (VIKAS BAHL)
Davinder Kumar JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes/No
Whether reportable:- Yes/No
4 of 4
