Gurminder [email protected] Singh ... vs State Of Punjab And Others
2023 Latest Caselaw 594 P&H

                                                                 293
  HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
                                ****
                        CRM-M-29385-2020
                     Date of Decision: 12.01.2023
                                ****
Gurminder Singh @ Gurwinder Singh @ Mangi         ... Petitioner

                                        VS.

State of Punjab & Ors.                                    ... Respondents
                               ****
CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SANDEEP MOUDGIL
                               ****
Present: Mr. Surinder Thakur, Advocate for the petitioner

            Mr. Mohit Kapoor, Addl. AG Punjab

          Mr. Sohrab Dhanda, Advocate for respondents No.2&3
                               ****
Sandeep Moudgil, J. (Oral)

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

No.74 dated 21.12.2019 (Annexure P1) under Section 420 IPC and Section

13 of the Punjab Travel Professionals (Regulation) Act, 2014, registered at

Police Station Garhdiwal, District Hoshiarpur along with all proceedings

arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise/settlement deeds dated

13.02.2020 & 24.08.2020 (Annexures P2 & P3, respectively).

During the pendency of the dispute, the parties have

compromised the matter. Vide order dated 16.02.2021, 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 15.04.2021 has been received from learned

JMIC, Dasuya stating that the parties have entered into a compromise without

any undue influence or pressure.

1 of 3

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 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

2 of 3

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 wastage of

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

In view of above, prayer made in the present petition is allowed

and the above mentioned FIR (Annexure P1), with all subsequent

proceedings arising therefrom are quashed qua the petitioner in view of the

compromise/settlement deeds dated 13.02.2020 & 24.08.2020 (Annexures P2

& P3, respectively).

Disposed off.

Needless to say that the parties shall remain bound by the terms

of compromise and their statements made before the Court below.

12.01.2023                                          (Sandeep Moudgil)
V.Vishal
                                                          Judge
1. Whether speaking/reasoned?                     Yes/No
2. Whether reportable?                            Yes/No




                                  3 of 3