Thursday, 21, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Vinod Kumar Kundu And Ors vs State Of Haryana And Anr
2022 Latest Caselaw 12702 P&H

Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 12702 P&H
Judgement Date : 30 September, 2022

Punjab-Haryana High Court
Vinod Kumar Kundu And Ors vs State Of Haryana And Anr on 30 September, 2022
  HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
                               ****
257                  CRM-M-2373-2021
                     Date of Decision: 30.09.2022
                               ****
Vinod Kumar Kundu & Ors.                          ... Petitioners

                                        VS.

State of Haryana & Anr.                                   ... Respondents
                              ****
CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SANDEEP MOUDGIL
                              ****
Present: Mr. Suneel Ranga, Advocate for the petitioners

            Mr. Surender Singh, AAG Haryana

          Mr. Nonish Kumar, Advocate for respondent No.2
                              ****
Sandeep Moudgil, J. (Oral)

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

No.825 dated 09.12.2020 under Sections 406/420/506 IPC and Section 10 of

Emigration Act, 1983 registered at Police Station Thanesar City, District

Kurukshetra (Annexure P1) and all other subsequent proceedings arising

therefrom on the basis of compromise dated 08.01.2021 (Annexure P2).

During the pendency of the dispute, the parties have

compromised the matter. Vide order dated 18.01.2021, parties were directed

to appear before the Illaqa Magistrate/Trial Court and for report with regard

to the genuineness of the compromise.

The report dated 18.02.2021 has been received from learned

CJM, Kurukshetra stating that the parties have entered into a compromise

without any undue influence or pressure.

A Full Bench of this Court in Kulwinder Singh and others vs.

State of Punjab, 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052, has held:-

1 of 3

"The only inevitable conclusion from the above discussion is that there is no statutory bar under the Cr.P.C. which can affect the inherent power of this Court under Section 482. Further, the same cannot be limited to matrimonial cases alone and the Court has the wide power to quash the proceedings even in noncompoundable offences notwithstanding the bar under Section 320 of the Cr.P.C., in order to prevent the abuse of law and to secure the ends of justice. The power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. is to be exercised Ex-Debitia Justitia to prevent an abuse of process of Court. There can neither be an exhaustive list nor the defined para-meters to enable a High Court to invoke or exercise its inherent powers. It will always depend upon the facts and circumstances of each case. The power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. has no limits. However, the High Court will exercise it sparingly and with utmost care and caution. The exercise of power has to be with circumspection and restraint. The Court is a vital and an extra-ordinary effective instrument to maintain and control social order. The Courts play role of paramount importance in achieving peace, harmony and everlasting congeniality in society. Resolution of a dispute by way of a compromise between two warring groups, therefore, should attract the immediate and prompt attention of a Court which should endeavour to give full effect to the same unless such compromise is abhorrent to lawful composition of the society or would promote savagery."

The legal principles as laid down for quashing of the judgment

were also approved by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of 'Gian

Singh Versus State of Punjab and another, (2012) 10 SCC 303' .

Furthermore, the broad principles for exercising the powers under Section

482 were summarized by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of

2 of 3

'Parbatbhai Aahir @ Parbatbhai Bhimsinhbhai Karmur and others versus

State of Gujarat and another" (2017) 9 SCC 641'.

It is evident that in view of the amicable resolution of the issues

amongst the parties, no useful purpose would be served by continuation of the

proceedings. The furtherance of the proceedings is likely to be wastage of

judicial time as there appears to be no chances of conviction.

In view of above, the present petition is allowed and the above

mentioned FIR (Annexure P1) with all subsequent proceedings arising

therefrom are quashed qua the petitioners in view of compromise (Annexure

P2).

30.09.2022                                          (Sandeep Moudgil)
V.Vishal
                                                          Judge
1. Whether speaking/reasoned?                     Yes/No
2. Whether reportable?                            Yes/No




                                  3 of 3

 

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : MAIMS

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter