Arun Duhan And Others vs State Of Haryana And Others
2023 Latest Caselaw 14055 P&H

                                                         Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:111115


CRM-M-23298-2023                     2023:PHHC:111115                    1



      IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
                     CHANDIGARH

276                                           CRM-M-23298-2023 (O&M)
                                              Date of decision: 24.08.2023

Arun Duhan and others
                                                                    ..Petitioners

                                       Versus

State of Haryana and others
                                                                    ..Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMAN CHAUDHARY

Present:         Mr. Paramjeet Phor, Advocate for the petitioners.

                 Mr. Dhruv Sihag, AAG, Haryana.

                 Mr. Surjit, Advocate for respondents No.2 and 3.

       ***

AMAN CHAUDHARY, J

1. The present petition has been filed for quashing of FIR

No.48, dated 19.01.2023, registered under Sections 406 and 420 IPC and

Section 24 of Immigration Act, at Police Station Assandh, District Karnal,

and all other consequential proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of

the compromise dated 21.02.2023.

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and also gone through

the case file.

3. This Court while issuing notice of motion vide order dated

03.07.2023, directed the parties to appear before the trial Court/Illaqa

Magistrate for recording their statements with regard to the compromise.

4. Pursuant to the aforesaid order, report dated 11.08.2023 has

been received from the Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Assandh. A

perusal of the said report reveals that statements of the concerned persons

have been recorded in the present case, who have stated that the matter

1 of 3

Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:111115

has been settled between them and they have no objection in case the FIR

in question is quashed. The compromise effected between them is

genuine, without any undue influence and coercion. It is stated in the

report that there are four accused. None of the accused-petitioners has

been declared as proclaimed offender and petitioner No.1-Arun Duhan is

involved in one more case.

5. The Full Bench of this Court in Kulwinder Singh and

others vs. State of Punjab, 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052, 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 view that the same was 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.

6. Hon'ble the Supreme Court of India in the case of Gian

Singh vs. State of Punjab and another, 2012 (4) RCR (Criminal) 543,

had 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 reads thus:-

"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"

2 of 3

Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:111115

7. Hon'ble The Supreme Court of India in case of Jayrajsingh

Digvijaysingh Rana vs. State of Gujrat and another, 2012(12) SCC

401, held that where there is a partial compromise with some of the

accused even then also the proceedings against the said accused should be

quashed as the same would not even remotely result in his conviction.

8. In view of the afore-referred judgments, perusing the report

of the trial Court regarding amicable settlement between the petitioners

and the complainants, this Court finds that quashing the FIR will accord a

quietus to all disputes between the parties and it is in the interest of both

sides to bury the hatchet and lead a peaceful life. Thus, no useful purpose

would be served in continuing the proceedings and in order to secure the

ends of justice, the criminal proceedings in the present case deserve to be

quashed.

9. Resultantly, the present petition is allowed and FIR No.48,

dated 19.01.2023, registered under Sections 406 and 420 IPC and Section

24 of Immigration Act, at Police Station Assandh, District Karnal, and all

other consequential proceedings arising therefrom are quashed qua the

petitioners on the basis of the compromise dated 21.02.2023.

                                               (AMAN CHAUDHARY )
24.08.2023                                          JUDGE
ashok
             Whether speaking/reasoned :       Yes/No

             Whether reportable :              Yes/No




                                                     Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:111115

                                 3 of 3