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

Gurpreet Singh @ Happy And Others vs State Of Punjab And Another
2022 Latest Caselaw 10429 P&H

Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 10429 P&H
Judgement Date : 5 September, 2022

Punjab-Haryana High Court
Gurpreet Singh @ Happy And Others vs State Of Punjab And Another on 5 September, 2022
258
            IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                         AT CHANDIGARH

                                       CRM-M-4203-2020
                                       DECIDED ON: 05.09.2022


GURPREET SINGH @ HAPPY AND OTHERS
                                                     .....PETITIONERS

                                 VERSUS


STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER
                                                     .....RESPONDENTS

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MOUDGIL.

Present: Mr. Satnam Singh, Advocate for Mr. T.P.S. Makkar, Advocate for the petitioners.

Mr. Joginder Pal Ratra, Sr. DAG, Punjab.

Mr. Aarish Kamboj, Advocate for Mr. Amandeep Singh Chahal, Advocate for respondent No.2.

SANDEEP MOUDGIL, J (ORAL)

This is a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of FIR

No.2, dated 05.01.2020 (Annexure P-1), under Section 379-B of the Indian

Penal Code, 1860, registered at Police Station Lambi, District Sri Muktsar

Sahib, on the basis of compromise dated 18.01.2020 (Annexure P-2).

During the pendency of the dispute, the parties have

compromised the matter and filed the present petition for quashing of FIR.

Vide order dated 30.01.2020, parties were directed to appear

before the Illaqa Magistrate/Trial Court and for report with regard to the

genuineness of the compromise.

The report dated 02.03.2020 has been received from learned

1 of 3

District & Sessions Judge, Sri Muktsar Sahib, stating that the parties have

entered into a compromise voluntarily without any threat or any undue

influence.

Full Bench of this Court in Kulwinder Singh and others vs.

State of Punjab, 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052, has held:-

"The only inevitable conclusion from the above discussion is that there is no statutory bar under the Cr.P.C. which can affect the inherent power of this Court under Section 482. Further, the same cannot be limited to matrimonial cases alone and the Court has the wide power to quash the proceedings even in noncompoundable offences notwithstanding the bar under Section 320 of the Cr.P.C., in order to prevent the abuse of law and to secure the ends of justice.

The power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. is to be exercised Ex-Debitia Justitia to prevent an abuse of process of Court. There can neither be an exhaustive list nor the defined para-meters to enable a High Court to invoke or exercise its inherent powers. It will always depend upon the facts and circumstances of each case. The power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. has no limits. However, the High Court will exercise it sparingly and with utmost care and caution. The exercise of power has to be with circumspection and restraint. The Court is a vital and an extra-ordinary effective instrument to maintain and control social order. The Courts play role of paramount importance in achieving peace, harmony and ever- lasting congeniality in society. Resolution of a dispute by way of a compromise between two warring groups, therefore, should attract the immediate and prompt attention of a Court which should endeavour to give full effect to the same unless such compromise is abhorrent to lawful composition of the society or would promote savagery."

2 of 3

The legal principles as laid down for quashing of the judgment

were also approved by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of 'Gian

Singh Versus State of Punjab and another,(2012) 10 SCC 303'.

Furthermore, the broad principles for exercising the powers under Section

482 were summarized by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of

'Parbatbhai Aahir @ Parbatbhai Bhimsinhbhai Karmur and others versus

State of Gujarat and another" (2017) 9 SCC 641'.

It is evident that in view of the amicable resolution of the issues

amongst the parties, no useful purpose would be served by continuation of

the proceedings. The furtherance of the proceedings is likely to be a waste of

judicial time and there appears to be no chances of conviction.

In view of above, the present petition is allowed and the above

mentioned FIR dated 05.01.2020 (Annexure P-1) with all subsequent

proceedings arising therefrom are quashed qua the petitioners, in view of

compromise (Annexure P-2).




                                                (SANDEEP MOUDGIL)
05.09.2022                                            JUDGE
Poonam Negi

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