Gurmeet Singh vs State Of Haryana And Another
2022 Latest Caselaw 10725 P&H

CRM-M-27495-2022                                                      1

      IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT
                     CHANDIGARH
                       ****

CRM-M-27495-2022 Date of decision:08.09.2022 Gurmeet Singh ... Petitioner Versus

State of Haryana and another ... Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS BAHL

Present: Mr. Siddarth, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Dhruv Sihag, 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.236 dated 02.07.2021 registered under Sections 406,

420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 at Police Station Naraingarh, District

Ambala and all other consequential proceedings arising therefrom on the

basis of compromise.

On 17.08.2022, this Court was pleased to pass the following

order:-

"Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that petitioner has deposited Rs.5,000/-, as ordered by this Court, vide order dated 21.07.2022 and has produced a receipt, which is taken on record and Marked as 'Mark A'.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that one last opportunity be granted to the parties to get their statements recorded before the Illaqa Magistrate/trial Court.

Adjourned to 08.09.2022.

The parties are directed to appear before the Illaqa Magistrate/trial Court for recording their statements qua compromise within a period of 15 days from today.

The Illaqa Magistrate/trial Court is directed to submit a report on or before the next date of hearing containing the following information:-

1 of 4

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 before the Illaqa Magistrate/trial Court in spite of the direction given vide order dated 21.07.2022, thus, the abovesaid opportunity is granted, subject to the payment of costs of Rs.5,000/- which shall be deposited by the petitioner in the 'High Court Lawyers' Welfare Fund', within a period of 15 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.

                                                         (VIKAS BAHL)
            August 17, 2022                                 JUDGE"

In pursuance to the said order, a report has been submitted by

Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate-cum-Additional Civil Judge (Senior

Division), Naraingarh. The relevant portion of the said report is reproduced

hereinbelow:-

"In compliance of the order of Hon'ble High Court, the parties to aforementioned case appeared before the Illaqua Magistrate/Trial Court on 01.09.2022. The parties produced copy of the receipt regarding deposit of cost in High Court Lawyers Welfare Fund. It was stated by both the affected parties in their separately recorded statements that they had arrived at a compromise with their free consent. Complainant Vijay has stated that he has arrived at compromise with accused with his free consent and without any pressure. He has also stated that compromise is in the interest of both the parties and he has `no objection' to the quashing of FIR by Hon'ble High Court.

It is further submitted that the compromise is genuine, voluntary, and without any coercion or undue influence.

It is further submitted that as per statement made by Investigating Officer, only one person named Gurmeet Singh has been arrayed as accused in the FIR No.236 dated

2 of 4

02.07.2021 registered at Police Station Naraingarh and he has not been declared proclaimed offender in this case. It is also submitted that as per statement of Investigating Officer, accused is involved in four other FIRs (all registered in Punjab).

xxx xxx xxx Thanking you, Yours Sincerely,

(Sumitra Kadian)"

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

voluntary, genuine, and out of free will.

Further perusal of the report would also show that an amount of

Rs.5,000/- has already been deposited by the petitioner, as ordered by this

Court, vide order dated 17.08.2022.

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

3 of 4

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 FIR No.236 dated 02.07.2021 registered under Sections 406,

420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 at Police Station Naraingarh, District

Ambala and all the subsequent proceedings emanating therefrom are

ordered to be quashed, qua the petitioner.

                                                       (VIKAS BAHL)
08.09.2022                                                JUDGE
Ishwar


             Whether speaking/reasoned                Yes/No
             Whether reportable                       Yes/No



                                4 of 4