Punjab-Haryana High Court
Kashmir Singh And Ors vs State Of Punjab And Ors on 6 September, 2022
CRM-M-14533-2019 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
****
CRM-M-14533-2019
Date of decision:06.09.2022
Kashmir Singh and others
... Petitioners
Versus
State of Punjab and others
... Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS BAHL
Present: Mr. Jasmandeep Singh, Advocate for the petitioners.
Mr. Iqbal S. Mann, DAG, Punjab.
Ms. Satwant Mehta, Advocate for respondents No.2 and 3.
VIKAS BAHL, J.(ORAL)
This is a petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing
of DDR No.18 dated 13.04.2017 registered as a cross case in FIR No.29
dated 02.04.2017 under Sections 323, 325, 506, 148, 149 of the Indian
Penal Code, 1860 registered at Police Station Verowal, District Tarn Taran
(Annexure P-1) and all the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the
basis of compromise.
On 02.08.2022, this Court was pleased to pass the following
order:-
"Learned counsel for the parties has submitted that one
last opportunity be granted to the parties to get their
statements recorded before the Illaqa Magistrate/trial Court.
Adjourned to 06.09.2022.
The parties are directed to appear before the Illaqa
Magistrate/trial Court for recording their statements qua
compromise within a period of 3 weeks from today.
The Illaqa Magistrate/trial Court is directed to submit a
report on or before the next date of hearing containing the
1 of 5
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.
However, since the statement of the parties could not be
recorded as the parties have not appeared before the Illaqa
Magistrate/trial Court in spite of giving direction, thus, the
abovesaid opportunity is granted, subject to the payment of
costs of Rs.5,000/- which shall be deposited by the petitioners
with the Bar Clerks Association, Punjab and Haryana High
Court, Chandigarh, within a period of 10 days from today.
The trial Court shall only record the statements of
parties on production of receipt of said payment.
It is made clear that if the said amount is not deposited
within the stipulated period of time, then the present petition
would be deemed to have been dismissed.
A photocopy of this order be placed on the file of other
connected order.
(VIKAS BAHL)
02.08.2022 JUDGE"
In pursuance to the said order, a report has been submitted by
Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Khadur Sahib. The relevant portion of
the said report is reproduced hereinbelow:-
"The Statement of ASI Lakhwinder Singh belt no.816/TT
was also recorded. As per statement of IO and statement of
both the parties the report is as follows: -
i) That the present FIR was registered on the statement of
complainant Pratap Singh @ Sahib Singh against seven
accused persons namely Kashmir Singh, Hardev Singh
@ Bittu, Mohinder Kaur, Sukhdev Singh, Baljinder
Singh, Gulab Singh and Harjit Kaur.
ii) That there is no accused declared Proclaimed Offender
in present case.
iii) That the compromise drawn amongst the parties
concerned, covers all the concerned in the penal
2 of 5
transaction concerned and the same is genuine,
voluntarily, without any coercion or undue influence
with their free will.
iv) That the above said accused persons are not involved in
any other FIR.
v) That the complainant Pratap Singh @ Sahib Singh and
Akashdeep Singh are victims in this case and they got
received injuries at the time of occurrence.
As such, the compliance report alongwith the statements
of the present parties is hereby sent to your goodself's office.
Report submitted, please.
Yours faithfully,
Ms. Gurpreet Kaur, PCS,
Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate,
Khadur Sahib"
A perusal of the above said report would show that the
petitioners and respondents No.2 & 3 have appeared and suffered
statements with respect to the compromise, which have been found to be
voluntary, genuine, and out of free will.
Learned counsel for the petitioners has further submitted that
the petitioners were not declared proclaimed offenders in the present case.
Learned State counsel has stated that he has no objection in
case the FIR is quashed on the basis of compromise qua the petitioners.
Learned counsel for respondents No.2 and 3 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
3 of 5
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
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 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", 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."
In view of what has been discussed hereinabove, this petition is
allowed and DDR No.18 dated 13.04.2017 registered as a cross case in FIR
No.29 dated 02.04.2017 under Sections 323, 325, 506, 148, 149 of the
4 of 5
Indian Penal Code, 1860 registered at Police Station Verowal, District Tarn
Taran (Annexure P-1) and all the subsequent proceedings emanating
therefrom are ordered to be quashed, qua the petitioners.
(VIKAS BAHL)
06.09.2022 JUDGE
Ishwar
Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No
Whether reportable Yes/No
5 of 5
