Harmanpreet Singh And Ors vs State Of Punjab And Anr
2022 Latest Caselaw 10668 P&H

CRM-M-41775-2020                                                      - 1-


254
             IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
                       AT CHANDIGARH

                                   ****

CRM-M-41775-2020 DECIDED ON: 7th SEPTEMBER, 2022

HARMANPREET SINGH AND OTHERS PETITIONERS

VERSUS

STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER RESPONDENTS

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MOUDGIL.

Present:     Mr. B.D. Sharma, Advocate
             for the petitioners.

             Mr. Aman Dhir, DAG, Punjab.

             Mr. Pawan Sharma, Advocate
             for respondent No.2.

             ****

SANDEEP MOUDGIL, J (ORAL)

Instant petition has been filed for seeking quashing of FIR No.

274, dated 20.09.2020 (Annexure P-1) under Sections 323, 341, 427, 458,

506, 148 and 149 IPC, registered at Police Station Shahkot, District

Jalandhar and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom on the basis

of compromise deeds dated 23.11.2020 and 25.11.2020 (Annexure P-2 &

P-3, respectively).

During the pendency of the dispute, the parties have

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

Vide order dated 11.12.2020 parties were directed to appear

1 of 3

CRM-M-41775-2020 - 2-

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

genuineness of the compromise.

The report dated 28.12.2020 has been received from learned

Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Nakodar stating that the parties have entered

into a compromise voluntarily, which is genuine. without any coercion or

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."

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

2 of 3

CRM-M-41775-2020 - 3-

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 (Annexure P-1) with all subsequent proceedings arising

therefrom are quashed qua the petitioners in view of compromise

(Annexure P-2 & P-3).

SANDEEP MOUDGIL JUDGE 7th SEPTEMBER, 2022.

sham

              1. Whether speaking/ reasoned :        Yes / No
              2. Whether reportable         :        Yes / No




                                    3 of 3