Punjab-Haryana High Court
Alankar Sudhir And Anr vs State Of Punjab And Another on 8 February, 2023
CRM-5455-2023 in/and 1
CRM-M-41940-2021 (O&M)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
Sr. No.121 CRM-5455-2023 in/and
CRM-M-41940-2021 (O&M)
Date of Decision: 08.02.2023
Alankar Sudhir and another .... Petitioners
Versus
State of Punjab and another ... Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA
Present: Ms. Navneet Kaur, Advocate for
Mr. Amit Dhawan, Advocate
for the petitioners.
Mr. Jashandeep Singh, AAG, Punjab.
Mr. Varun Goyal, Advocate
for respondent No.2/complainant.
***
TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA, J. (ORAL)
CRM-5455-2023
This is an application seeking preponement of date of hearing of
main case.
For the reasons stated in the application, the same is allowed.
The date of hearing of main case is advanced to today itself and the main
case is taken on board.
CRM-M-41940-2021
The instant petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
seeking quashing of FIR No.110 dated 17.09.2021, registered under Sections
406 and 498-A of IPC at Police Station Women, Police Commissionerate,
Jalandhar (Annexure P-1) and all consequential proceedings arising
1 of 3
CRM-M-41940-2021 (O&M)
therefrom, in view of the compromise and affidavit dated 28.09.2021
(Annexures P-2 and P-3 respectively), entered into between the petitioners
and the complainant to settle their disputes in question.
2. Keeping in view the fact that the parties had entered into a
compromise, they were directed to appear before the Illaqa Magistrate/trial
Court for getting their statements recorded in that regard, vide order dated
30.11.2022. Pursuant thereto, a report dated 18.01.2023 has been received
from Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Jalandhar, at Flag 'A', stating that the
compromise arrived at between the parties is without any pressure, coercion
or undue influence.
3. Learned State counsel and learned counsel appearing on behalf
of respondent No.2 admit the factum of compromise, and submit that they
have no objection to quashing of the FIR on that basis.
4. It has been held by the Supreme Court of India in cases Gian
Singh v. State of Punjab and another, 2012(10) SCC 303 and Narinder Singh
and others v. State of Punjab and another, 2014(6) SCC 466, that criminal
cases having overwhelmingly civil character, particularly those arising out of
commercial transactions or matrimonial relationships or family disputes,
should be quashed when the parties have resolved their disputes among
themselves in a bona fide manner by entering into a compromise.
5. Further, reference can also be made to Full Bench judgment of
this Court in Kulwinder Singh and others v. State of Punjab and another,
2007(3) R.C.R.(Criminal) 1052, wherein it has been held that on the parties
settling their disputes by way of a compromise the High Court in exercise of
power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. can allow the compounding of
non-compoundable offences also, and quash the prosecution to prevent
2 of 3
CRM-M-41940-2021 (O&M)
abuse of the process of law or otherwise to secure the ends of justice. The
power is not confined to matrimonial disputes alone.
6. A perusal of the allegations in the FIR as well as the aforesaid
report establishes that the present case falls in the category of cases that can
be quashed by the High Court in exercise of its inherent jurisdiction under
Section 482 Cr.P.C., as per law laid down in the aforementioned judgments.
Since disputes between the parties have been amicably resolved by way of
the compromise, continuation of criminal proceedings will be an exercise in
futility, as chances of ultimate conviction are not there.
7. Consequently, this petition is allowed. FIR No.110 dated
17.09.2021, registered under Sections 406 and 498-A of IPC at Police
Station Women, Police Commissionerate, Jalandhar, and all consequential
proceedings arising therefrom are hereby quashed qua the petitioners.
(TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA)
JUDGE
08.02.2023
Maninder
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No
Whether reportable : Yes/No
3 of 3
