Punjab-Haryana High Court
Pawan Mittal vs State Of Haryana And Another on 7 September, 2022
CRM-M-9159-2020 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
****
CRM-M-9159-2020
Date of decision:07.09.2022
Pawan Mittal
... Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana and another
... Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS BAHL
Present: Mr. Denesh Goyal, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Praveen Bhadu, AAG, Haryana.
None for respondent No.2.
VIKAS BAHL, J.(ORAL)
This is a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. praying for
quashing of FIR No.0167 dated 23.07.2019 registered under Sections 452,
506 IPC at Police Station Sector 14, Panchkula and all other consequential
proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise.
On 16.08.2022, this Court was pleased to pass the following
order:-
"This is a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. praying
for quashing of FIR No.0167 dated 23.07.2019 registered
under Sections 452, 506 IPC at Police Station Sector 14,
Panchkula and all other consequential proceedings arising
therefrom on the basis of compromise.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that all
the persons concerned are party to the compromise.
Mr. Praveen Bhadu, AAG, Haryana, appears on behalf
of respondent no.1. Mr. Ajay Aggarwal, Advocate, appears on
behalf of complainant-respondent no.2 and admits the factum
of compromise.
The parties are directed to appear before the Illaqa
Magistrate/trial Court for recording their statements qua
1 of 4
compromise within a period of 10 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.
Adjourned to 07.09.2022.
(VIKAS BAHL)
August 16, 2022 JUDGE"
In pursuance to the said order, a report has been submitted by
Chief Judicial Magistrate, Panchkula. The relevant portion of the said report
is reproduced hereinbelow:-
"Respected Sir,
With all due reverence at my command I wish to submit
that in compliance of order dated 16.08.2022 of Hon'ble
Punjab and Haryana High Court in CRM-M-9159 of 2020,
parties namely Sudesh and Pawan Mittal appeared in the court
on 22.08.2022. Their statements were recorded regarding
compromise. From the statements of the parties it appears that
that they have genuinely compromised the matter, and the
compromise is result of their free will, volition, Voluntary and
without any coercion. Further compromise deed Ex.C1 has
been duly signed by the complainant and accused namely
Pawan Mittal. This is for your kind information and necessary
action, please.
Thanking you,
Yours sincerely,
(Nitin Raj)"
A perusal of the above said report would show that the
petitioner and complainant-respondent No.2 have appeared and suffered
statements with respect to the compromise, which have been found to be
2 of 4
voluntary, genuine, and out of free will.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that the
petitioner was not declared proclaimed offender 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 petitioner.
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", 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:-
3 of 4
"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 FIR No.0167 dated 23.07.2019 registered under Sections 452,
506 IPC at Police Station Sector 14, Panchkula and all the subsequent
proceedings emanating therefrom are ordered to be quashed, qua the
petitioner.
(VIKAS BAHL)
07.09.2022 JUDGE
Ishwar
Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No
Whether reportable Yes/No
4 of 4
