Jasmeen Singh vs State Of Punjab And Anr
2022 Latest Caselaw 10911 P&H

                                                                          -1-
CRM-M-8666 of 2020


        IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                     AT CHANDIGARH

                                         CRM-M-8666 of 2020
                                         Date of Decision: 09.09.2022

Jasmeen Singh
                                                               .... Petitioner
                   Versus

State of Punjab and another
                                                            .... Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR VERMA

Present: -   Mr. A.S. Khosa, Advocate, for the petitioner.
             Mr. Viney Kumar Gupta, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab.
             Mr. H.P.S. Sidhu, Advocate, for respondent No.2.

ASHOK KUMAR VERMA, J. (ORAL)

The petitioner has filed the present petition under Section

482 Cr.P.C., for quashing FIR No.343 dated 28.07.2013 registered under

Sections 307/325/323/506 IPC at Police Station Tripuri, District Patiala

and for setting aside judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated

06.12.2016 passed by the trial Court whereby petitioner has been

convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three

years and to pay a fine of `5000/- under Section 325 IPC and in default of

payment of fine to further undergo simple imprisonment for one month

and to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of

`1000/- under Section 323 IPC and in default of payment of fine to

further undergo simple imprisonment for 15 days and all subsequent

proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise dated

05.02.2020 (Annexure P-3).

Pursuant to the order dated 27.02.2020 passed by a co-

1 of 3

CRM-M-8666 of 2020

ordinate Bench of this Court, the parties appeared before the Judicial

Magistrate Ist Class, Patiala, to get their statements recorded. Learned

Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Patiala, has submitted his report along with

statements of the parties vide letter No.2 dated 04.05.2020 duly

forwarded by the District and Sessions Judge, Patiala, vide letter

No.2693/AL dated 05.05.2020.

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned State

counsel and learned counsel for respondent No. 2 and gone through the

relevant record.

It is now well settled that the High Court has inherent power

to quash the criminal proceedings in non-compoundable cases on the

basis of settlement between the parties for securing the ends of justice or

to prevent abuse of the process where the possibility of conviction is

remote and bleak and continuation of the criminal case would put the

accused to great oppression and prejudice and extreme injustice would be

caused to him by not quashing the criminal case. Criminal cases having

overwhelmingly and predominantly civil character particularly those

arising out of commercial transaction or arising out of matrimonial

relationship or family dispute can be quashed when the parties have

resolved their entire dispute among themselves. However, such power

cannot be exercised in those prosecutions which involve heinous and

serious offences of mental depravity or offences like murder, rape

dacoity, etc. which are not private in nature and have a serious impact on

society. Similarly, prosecution for offences alleged to have been

2 of 3

CRM-M-8666 of 2020

committed under special enactments like the Prevention of Corruption

Act or the offences committed by public servant while working in that

capacity cannot be quashed on the basis of compromise between the

victim and the offender. For judicial precedents in this regard, reference

may be made to Narinder Singh Vs. State of Punjab (Supreme Court) :

2014 (2) RCR (Criminal) 482, State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Laxmi

Narayan and others (Supreme Court) : 2019 (2) RCR (Criminal) 255

and Kulwinder Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab and others

(Punjab and Haryana High Court) : 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052.

According to the report, learned Judicial Magistrate Ist

Class, Patiala, is satisfied that parties have arrived at a compromise

voluntarily, without any coercion or undue influence and no accused has

been declared proclaimed offender.

Considering the report of learned Judicial Magistrate Ist

Class, Patiala dated 04.05.2020 and the fact that the compromise will

bring peace and harmony between the parties, aforesaid FIR No.343

dated 28.07.2013 and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom,

including judgment of conviction dated 06.12.2016 are quashed/set aside

and the petitioner stands acquitted of the charge.

Disposed of, accordingly.

September 09, 2022                          (ASHOK KUMAR VERMA)
R.S.                                               JUDGE

            Whether speaking/reasoned                Yes/No
            Whether Reportable                       Yes/No



                                3 of 3