Sumit Gupta And Anr vs State Of Haryana And Others
2023 Latest Caselaw 5590 P&H

                                                          Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:060245




251
                                                    2023:PHHC:060245

            IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                         AT CHANDIGARH

                                       CRM-M-39097-2022
                                       DECIDED ON: 27.04.2023


SUMIT GUPTA AND ANR.
                                                           .....PETITIONERS

                                   VERSUS

STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS
                                                           .....RESPONDENTS

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MOUDGIL

Present: Mr. Ankit Gupta, Advocate for the petitioners.

Mr. Amit Aggarwal, DAG, Haryana.

Mr. Gagandeep Sanwal, Advocate for complainant.

SANDEEP MOUDGIL, J (ORAL)

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

No.374, dated 21.05.2022 under Sections 323, 34, 506 of the Indian Penal

Code, 1860, registered at Police Station Kundli (Annexure P-1), with all the

consequential proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise

dated 21.07.2022 (Annexure P-2).

During the pendency of the dispute, the parties have

compromised the matter and filed the present petition for quashing of FIR.

Vide order dated 31.08.2022, parties were directed to appear

before the Illaqa Magistrate/Trial Court for recording of their statements and

report with regard to the genuineness of the compromise was called for.

The report dated 03.11.2022 has been received from Additional

Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sonepat stating that the parties have entered

1 of 3

Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:060245

into a compromise, which is genuine, voluntary and without any coercion or

undue influence.

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

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

"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 ever- lasting 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

2 of 3

Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:060245

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 '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 a waste of

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

In view of above, FIR (Annexure P-1), with all the consequential

proceedings arising therefrom, is quashed qua the petitioners, on the basis of

compromise dated 21.07.2022 (Annexure P-2).

The present petition is hereby allowed.

                                               (SANDEEP MOUDGIL)
27.04.2023                                           JUDGE
Meenu

Whether speaking/reasoned       Yes/No
Whether reportable              Yes/No




                                                          Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:060245

                                      3 of 3