Rajwinder Kaur And Ors vs State Of Punjab And Anr
2022 Latest Caselaw 12655 P&H

CRM-M-49000-2018 (O&M)                                                    -1-

236
       IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
                      CHANDIGARH

                                                 CRM-M-49000-2018 (O&M)
                                                 Date of decision : 30.09.2022

Rajwinder Kaur and others

                                                                     ...Petitioners

                                        Versus

State of Punjab and another

                                                                   ...Respondents

CORAM:      HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS BAHL

Present:    Mr. J.S. Bhandohal, Advocate for the petitioners.

            Mr. Iqbal S. Mann, DAG, Punjab.

            Mr. Gurjant Singh, respondent No.2 in person.

            ****

VIKAS BAHL, J. (ORAL)

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

FIR No.171 dated 13.10.2018 registered under Sections 447, 511, 148, 149,

427, 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 at Police Station Lalru, District

SAS Nagar (Mohali) and all the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom.

On 05.09.2022, this Court had passed the following order:-

"CRM-31453-2022 To be taken up with the main case.

CRM-31450-2022 Notice in the application to the learned opposite counsel for 30.09.2022, the date already fixed in the main case.

Learned counsel for the applicant-petitioners has pointed out that earlier petition was filed on merits and during the pendency of the main petition, a compromise has been

1 of 4

CRM-M-49000-2018 (O&M) -2-

effected between the parties and the compromise has been annexed as Annexure P-21 and even CRM-31453- 2022 has been filed for amendment of the title clause and prayer clause of the main petition.

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, Dera Bassi. The relevant portion of the

said report is reproduced hereinbelow:-

"In view of the above said order, all the accused/Petitioners namely Rajwinder Kaur, Manjit Kaur, Rameshwar Dass, Sardara Singh, Manjit Singh, Jagtar Singh, Jarnail Singh, Shiv Dayal, Simran Singh, Dalbir Singh, Parminder Singh, Balvir Singh, Harjit Singh, Kamaldeep Singh, Harjinder Singh, Pritam Singh, Harinder Singh and Parveen Kumar & complainant Gurjant Singh came present alongwith their respective counsels in the court and statements of both the parties have been recorded on 17.09.2022. After going through the statements of the parties and compromise dated 17.05.2022 i.e. Mark P2, it is observed that the matter

2 of 4

CRM-M-49000-2018 (O&M) -3-

has been compromised between the parties voluntarily. All the grievances have been settled amicably between the parties without any coercion or undue influence."

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

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.

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 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.

                                 3 of 4

 CRM-M-49000-2018 (O&M)                                                      -4-

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.171 dated 13.10.2018 registered under Sections 447, 511,

148, 149, 427, 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 at Police Station Lalru,

District SAS Nagar (Mohali) 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.

30.09.2022                                              (VIKAS BAHL)
Pawan                                                      JUDGE

               Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes/No

               Whether reportable:-              Yes/No




                                  4 of 4