Punjab-Haryana High Court
Sukhdev Singh vs State Of Punjab And Another on 10 October, 2022
CRM-M-44078-2021 -1-
256
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-44078-2021
Date of decision : 10.10.2022
Sukhdev Singh
...Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab and another
...Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS BAHL
Present: Mr. Kapil Khanna, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Iqbal S. Mann, DAG, Punjab.
Mr. Karan Singh Shekhawat, Advocate for
Mr. Animesh Sharma, Advocate for respondent No.2.
****
VIKAS BAHL, J. (ORAL)
This is a petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. for quashing of
FIR No.125 dated 31.07.2018 registered under Sections 420, 465, 467, 468,
471, 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 at Police Station Navi Baradari,
District Jalandhar and all the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on
the basis of compromise.
On 30.11.2021, a Coordinate Bench of this Court was pleased
to pass the following order:-
"Reply filed on behalf of respondent No.1 in Court
today, is taken on record.
Adjourned to 28.01.2022.
The parties are directed to appear before the learned
1 of 4
trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate on 23.12.2021 or any other
date convenient to the trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate, to get
recorded their statements regarding compromise and after
recording their statements, learned trial Court/Illaqa
Magistrate is directed to send report regarding the
genuineness of compromise and also to intimate whether
any PO proceedings are pending against any of the party on
or before the date fixed i.e. 28.01.2022.
Sd/-(JAISHREE THAKUR)
JUDGE
30.11.2021"
In pursuance of the abovesaid order, a report has been
submitted by the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Jalandhar. The relevant
portion of the said report is reproduced hereinbelow:-
"4. I have gone through the statement given by complainant
Deepak Raj Bindra and accused Sukhdev Singh. In view of
the statements, I am of the considered opinion that the
compromise has been effected voluntarily between the
parties and the same is without any coercion and undue
influence. Compromise between them appears to be
genuine."
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 petitioner has submitted that the
2 of 4
petitioner was not declared proclaimed offender in the present case.
Learned counsel for the State, as per instructions has stated that the said 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
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
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
3 of 4
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.125 dated 31.07.2018 registered under Sections 420,
465, 467, 468, 471, 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 at Police Station
Navi Baradari, District Jalandhar and all the subsequent proceedings arising
therefrom on the basis of compromise, are ordered to be quashed, qua the
petitioner.
All the pending miscellaneous applications, if any, stand
disposed of in view of the abovesaid judgment.
10.10.2022 (VIKAS BAHL)
Pawan JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes/No
Whether reportable:- Yes/No
4 of 4
