Thursday, 21, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Avtar Singh And Ors vs State Of Punjab And Another
2022 Latest Caselaw 15355 P&H

Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 15355 P&H
Judgement Date : 30 November, 2022

Punjab-Haryana High Court
Avtar Singh And Ors vs State Of Punjab And Another on 30 November, 2022
CRM-M-41628-2022 (O&M)                                                -1-

            IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
                         AT CHANDIGARH
271
                                                      CRM-M-41628-2022 (O&M)
                                                       Date of decision: 30.11.2022

AVTAR SINGH AND ORS.
                                                                      ....Petitioners
                                Versus


STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER
                                                                     ...Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMAN CHAUDHARY
                         *****

Present : Mr. A.K. Kathpal, Advocate for the petitioners.

Mr. Kamalpreet Bawa, AAG Punjab.

Mr. Dhawaljeet Dujia, Advocate for respondent No.2.

*****

AMAN CHAUDHARY. J.

Present petition has been filed for quashing of DDR No.23 dated

29.06.2015, under Sections 326, 323, 324, 325, 506, 148, 149 IPC, addition of

offence vide DDR No.18 dated 27.11.2018 under Sections 342/201 in case FIR

No.66 dated 29.06.2015 under Sections 323, 324, 452, 506, 148 and 149 of the

IPC registered at Police Station Verowal, District Tarn Taran and all other

consequential proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of the compromise

Annexure P-3.

Notice of motion was issued on 12.09.2022 and both the parties were

directed to appear before the trial Court for recording their statements in the

context of genuineness of the compromise. The trial Court was also directed to

submit its report with regard to genuineness of the compromise.

Pursuant to the aforesaid order, report dated 12.10.2022 has been

1 of 3

CRM-M-41628-2022 (O&M) -2-

received from the Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Khadur Sahib. A perusal of

the said report reveals that statements of the concerned persons have been

recorded in the present case, who have stated that the matter has been settled

between the parties and they have no objection in case the FIR in question is

quashed and the compromise effected between them is genuine, without any

undue influence and coercion. It is stated in the report that there are seven

accused, however accused Jarnail Singh has expired. None of the accused has

been declared as proclaimed offender and none of them is involved in any other

FIR.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have also gone

through the case file.

After perusing the report submitted by the trial Court, this Court

finds that the matter has been amicably settled between the petitioner(s) and the

complainant(s). Since the matter has been settled and the parties have decided to

live in peace, this Court is of the view 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 view that the same was 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

2 of 3

CRM-M-41628-2022 (O&M) -3-

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 the above, the petition is allowed and DDR No.23 dated

29.06.2015, under Sections 326, 323, 324, 325, 506, 148, 149 IPC, addition of

offence vide DDR No.18 dated 27.11.2018 under Sections 342/201 in case FIR

No.66 dated 29.06.2015 under Sections 323, 324, 452, 506, 148 and 149 of the

IPC registered at Police Station Verowal, District Tarn Taran, and all other

consequential proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of the compromise

Annexure P-3, are quashed qua the petitioners.




                                                   (AMAN CHAUDHARY)
                                                        JUDGE
November 30, 2022
S.Sharma(syr)
        Whether speaking/reasoned          :      Yes/No
        Whether reportable                 :      Yes/No




                                         3 of 3

 

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : MAIMS

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter