Meer Singh And Ors vs State Of Haryana And Another
2022 Latest Caselaw 12385 P&H

CRM-M-39593-2022                                             -1-

286
       IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
                      CHANDIGARH

                                                 CRM-M-39593-2022
                                                 Date of decision : 28.09.2022

Meer Singh and others                                               ...Petitioners

                                        Versus

State of Haryana and another                                       ...Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS BAHL

Present:    Mr. Ankur Lal, Advocate for the petitioners.

            Mr. Dhruv Sihag, AAG, Haryana.

            Mr. Deepam Raghava, Advocate for respondent No.2.

            ****

VIKAS BAHL, J. (ORAL)

This is a petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. for quashing of

FIR No.49 dated 29.04.2016 registered under Sections 420 and 466 of the

Indian Penal Code, 1860 at Police Station Bawal, District Rewari and all the

subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise.

On 02.09.2022, this Court had passed the following order:-

"This is a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. praying for quashing of FIR No.49 dated 29.04.2016, registered under Sections 420 and 466 IPC, at Police Station Bawal, District Rewari and all other consequential proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise.

Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that all the persons concerned are party to the compromise.

Notice of motion for 21.09.2022.

On the asking of the Court, Mr. Praveen Bhadu, AAG, Haryana, accepts notice on behalf of respondent No.1 and

1 of 4

Mr. Deepam Raghava, appears and accepts notice on behalf of 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 compromise within a period of 15 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."

In pursuance of the abovesaid order, a report has been submitted

by the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Bawal. The relevant portion of the said

report is reproduced hereinbelow:-

"Perusal of the statements of the complainant and accused persons reflects that they have entered into the compromise voluntarily and without any pressure from any side. Compromise entered into between the parties is genuine and valid.

4. It is also reported that as per the statement of Investigating Officer. accused persons are not involved in any other F.I.R.

5. It is further reported that as per the Investigating Officer, there is only one complainant/victim namely Manjeet in this F.I.R."

A perusal of the said report would show that the compromise has

2 of 4

been found to be genuine, without any pressure or undue influence. It has

been stated that the statements of the complainant as well as the accused have

been recorded in the case and both have stated that the matter has been

compromised and they have no objection in case the FIR is quashed. It is

further stated that the statement of the complainant has been made voluntarily

without any fear, coercion or pressure.

Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the

petitioners were not declared proclaimed offender in the present case.

Learned counsel for the State, as per instructions has stated that the said fact

is correct.

Learned counsel for respondent No.2 has again reiterated that the

matter has been settled and the said compromise is in the interest of all the

persons and would help in bringing out peace and amity between the two

parties.

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 petitioners

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", reported as 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

3 of 4

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", reported as 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. XXX---XXX"

In view of what has been discussed hereinabove, the petition is

allowed and FIR No.49 dated 29.04.2016 registered under Sections 420 and

466 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 at Police Station Bawal, District Rewari

and all the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of

compromise, are ordered to be quashed, qua the petitioners.

All the pending miscellaneous applications, if any, stand

disposed of in view of the abovesaid judgment.

28.09.2022                                    (VIKAS BAHL)
Pawan                                            JUDGE
             Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes/No
             Whether reportable:-        Yes/No



                                4 of 4