Punjab-Haryana High Court
Balbir Singh @ Laddu And Ors vs State Of Punjab And Another on 31 January, 2023
252
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-38662-2022
DECIDED ON: 31.01.2023
BALBIR SINGH @ LADDU AND ORS.
.....PETITIONERS
VERSUS
STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER
.....RESPONDENTS
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MOUDGIL.
Present: None for the petitioners.
Mr. Mohit Chaudhary, AAG, Punjab.
None for respondent No.2.
SANDEEP MOUDGIL, J (ORAL)
No one has appeared on behalf of the petitioners today in Court.
This is a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of
complaint bearing No.COMI-243/2014, dated 09.01.2014 titled as 'Harjit
Kaur versus Balbir Singh and others', under Sections 326, 323, 324, 325,
506, 148 and 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Annexure P-1) and the
summoning order dated 21.09.2018 (Annexure P-2), with all the consequential
proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise (Annexure P-3).
During the pendency of the dispute, the parties have
compromised the matter and filed the present petition for quashing of FIR.
Vide order dated 24.11.2022, parties were directed to appear
before the Illaqa Magistrate/Trial Court and report with regard to the
genuineness of the compromise was called for.
1 of 3
The report dated 12.01.2022 has been received from Judicial
Magistrate Ist Class, Amritsar, stating that the parties have entered into a
compromise, which is genuine, voluntary and without any coercion or undue
influence.
There is no representation on behalf of respondent No.2, which
shows that he has no objection to the quashing of FIR.
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
2 of 3
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 '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, complaint bearing No.COMI-243/2014, dated
09.01.2014 titled as 'Harjit Kaur versus Balbir Singh and others', under
Sections 326, 323, 324, 325, 506, 148 and 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860
(Annexure P-1) and the summoning order dated 21.09.2018 (Annexure P-2),
with all the consequential proceedings arising therefrom, are quashed qua the
petitioners, on the basis of compromise (Annexure P-3).
The present petition is hereby allowed.
(SANDEEP MOUDGIL)
31.01.2023 JUDGE
Poonam Negi
Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No
Whether reportable Yes/No
3 of 3
