Punjab-Haryana High Court
Arun Kumar Gupta vs State Of Haryana And Anr on 9 September, 2022
CRM-M-40181-2020 -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
Sr. No.230 CRM-M-40181-2020
Date of Decision: September 09, 2022
Arun Kumar ...Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana and another ...Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMAN CHAUDHARY
Present:- Ms. Khushika Setia, Advocate f or
Mr. S.P.S. Chakkal, Advocate for the petitioner.
Ms. Aditi Girdhar, AAG, Haryana.
Mr. Brijmohan, Advocate for
Mr. Sanjay Khan, Advocate for respondent No.2.
AMAN CHAUDHARY, J.(Oral)
Present petition has been filed for quashing of FIR No.155,
dated 17.04.2019, under Sections 406, 420, 419, 465, 468 and 471 of the
IPC, registered at Police Station Thanesar Sadar, District Kurukshetra,
and all other consequential proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of
the compromise deed (Annexure P-2).
On 29.07.2022, this Court had passed the following order:-
" This is a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing
of FIR No. 155, dated 17th April, 2019, under Sections 406
and 420 of Indian Penal Code, 1860, registered at Police
Station Thanesar Sadar, District Kurukshetra and all other
subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of
compromise.
Notice of motion.
Mr. Gurmeet Singh, Assistant Advocate General, Haryana
and Mr. Kanhiya Soni, Advocate for Mr. Sanjay Khan,
appearing on advance notice accept the same on behalf of
1 of 4
respondents No. 1 and 2 respectively.
The parties are directed to appear before the Illaqa
Magistrate/trial court for recording their statements with
regard to the compromise on 8th August, 2022.
The trial court is directed to submit a report on or before the
next date of hearing containing the following information:
(i) Number of persons arrayed as accused in the FIR;
(ii)Whether any accused is declared as proclaimed offender;
(iii)Whether the compromise is genuine, voluntary and
without any coercion or undue influence.
List on 9th September, 2022. "
Pursuant to the aforesaid order, report dated 09.08.2022 has
been received from the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate,
Kurukshetra. The relevant part of the said report is as under:-
"Further the information sought by Hon'ble High Court in
the above said order is given as under:
1) Number of persons arrayed as accused in FIR.
There are four accused, who have been arrayed in FIR.
However, since nothing incriminating evidence was found
against Dushyant Rana, Saganpreet alias Preet and Ekta
Sharma, therefore, they were discharged by the police. At
the present there is only one accused facing trial in the
Court.
2) Whether any accused is proclaimed offender;
No
3) Whether the compromise is genuine, voluntary and
without any coercion or undue influence.
The said compromise/settlement is genuine and is not result
of any pressure or coercion in any manner."
A perusal of the said report reveals that statements of the
concerned persons have been recorded in the present case, who have
stated that the matter has been settled between the parties and they have
2 of 4
no objection in case the FIR in question is quashed. It is stated in the
report that there are four accused persons and the compromise effected
between the parties is genuine and has been arrived at between them
without any pressure or coercion. It is also stated in the report that none
of the accused is declared as proclaimed offender.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have also
gone through the case file.
After perusing the report submitted by the trial Court, this
Court finds that the matter has been amicably settled between the
petitioner(s) and the complainant(s). Since the matter has been settled and
the parties have decided to live in peace, this Court is of the view 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 view that the same was
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
3 of 4
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. XXX---XXX"
In view of the above, the petition is allowed and FIR No.155,
dated 17.04.2019, under Sections 406, 420, 419, 465, 468 and 471 of the
IPC, registered at Police Station Thanesar Sadar, District Kurukshetra,
and all other consequential proceedings arising therefrom, are quashed
qua the petitioners.
September 09, 2022 (AMAN CHAUDHARY)
sarita JUDGE
Whether reasoned/speaking: Yes/No
Whether reportable: Yes/No
4 of 4
