Punjab-Haryana High Court
Harvinder Singh And Ors vs State Of Haryana And Another on 3 November, 2022
CRM-M-45948-2022 -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-45948-2022
Date of decision : 03.11.2022
Harvinder Singh and others
...Petitioners
Versus
State of Haryana and anr.
...Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS BAHL
Present: None.
****
VIKAS BAHL, J. (ORAL)
Today, the Lawyers have decided to abstain from appearing in
the Court because of the call given by the Bar Association.
This is a first petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. for
quashing of FIR No.683 dated 29.07.2022 registered under Sections 420,
406 IPC and Section 24 of the Immigration Act at Police Station Assandh,
District Karnal, and all the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the
basis of compromise.
On 30.09.2022, this Court was pleased to pass the following
order:-
"This is a petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing
of FIR No.683 dated 29.07.2022 registered under Sections 420 and 406
of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 24 of the Immigration Act,
at Police Station Assandh, District Karnal and all the subsequent
proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise.
Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that in the
1 of 5
present case, there are four accused persons, out of which, three
accused persons i.e. the present petitioners have filed the present
petition for quashing of FIR on the basis of compromise and thus, the
present case is a case of partial compromise and has relied upon
judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Jayrajsinh
Digvijaysinh Rana Vs. State of Gujarat and another, reported as 2012
(12) SCC 401 to contend that even in case of a partial compromise,
FIR can be quashed qua the accused with whom the compromise has
been effected.
Notice of motion for 20.10.2022.
On asking of the Court, Mr. Dhruv Sihag, AAG, Haryana
appears and accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State and Ms.
Ishita Jain, Advocate appears on behalf of respondent No.2 and has
also reiterated the abovesaid facts as stated by learned counsel for the
petitioners.
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?
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.
30.09.2022 "
In pursuance of the abovesaid order, a report has been
submitted by the Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Assandh. The relevant
portion of the said report is reproduced hereinbelow:-
"Statements of all the parties i.e. complainant Sahab Singh and
accused persons (Harwinder Singh, Hardeep Kaur, Ankur )
2 of 5
were recorded on oath. All of them made statements to the
effect that they have voluntarily and amicably settled the
present case. The complainant further submitted that he has no
objection if the present FIR is quashed. The accused Harwinder
Singh, Hardeep Kaur, Ankur requested that in view of the
statement given by the complainant the present FIR be quashed.
The complainant and accused persons submitted that they have
given the statements in the Court without any fear, pressure or
coercion. In view of the statements given by the complainant
and accused persons in the court, it appears that the
compromise has been entered into voluntarily and without any
pressure or influence from any side between complainant
Sahab Singh and accused persons Harwinder Singh, Hardeep
Kaur, Ankur.)
xxx xxx xxx
Consequent upon the issuance of notice SI Shri Bhagwan
appeared in the ourt on 14.10.2022 and submitted a detailed
report. It was submitted by SI Shri Bhagwan that there are four
accused, namely, Virender Singh, Harwinder Singh, Hardeep
Kaur, Ankur in the present case and that there is only one
complainant, namely, Sahab Singh. "
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 has
further been stated that in all there are four accused persons out of which
three persons have filed the present petition.
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
3 of 5
justice, the criminal proceedings deserve to be quashed.
The Hon'ble Supreme Court in a case titled as Jayrajsinh
Digvijaysinh Rana Vs. State of Gujarat and another, reported as 2012 (12)
SCC 401, has held that where there is a partial compromise with some of the
accused then also, the proceedings against the said petitioner/accused
should be quashed as the same would not even remotely result in conviction
of the said accused.
The Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the judgment dated
04.07.2019 passed in CRM-M-16318-2018 titled as Dalip Mandal and
another Vs. State of U.T., Chandigarh and others was pleased to allow the
petition qua the petitioners only although, the matter had not been
compromised between all the parties.
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
4 of 5
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.683 dated 29.07.2022 registered under Sections 420,
406 IPC and Section 24 of the Immigration Act at Police Station Assandh,
District Karnal, and all the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the
basis of compromise, are ordered to be quashed, qua the petitioners.
03.11.2022 (VIKAS BAHL)
Davinder Kumar JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes/No
Whether reportable:- Yes/No
5 of 5
