Punjab-Haryana High Court
Sukhminder Singh And Others vs State Of Punjab And Others on 16 January, 2023
CRM-M-51285-2019 (O&M) -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
297
CRM-M-51285-2019 (O&M)
Date of decision: 16.01.2023
SUKHMINDER SINGH AND OTHERS
....Petitioner(s)
Versus
STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS
...Respondent(s)
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMAN CHAUDHARY
*****
Present : Mr. Vipul Dharmani, Advocate
for the petitioners.
Mr. Kamalpreet Bawa, AAG Punjab.
Mr. Akash Mehta, Advocate for
Ms. Gurdeep Kaur, Advocate
for respondent Nos. 2 to 5.
*****
AMAN CHAUDHARY. J.
Present petition has been filed for quashing of FIR No.21, dated
06.03.2014, under Sections 447, 324, 323, 506, 148, 149 (Section 325 added later
on) of IPC, registered at Police Station Sri Anandpur Sahib, District Rupnagar
and all other consequential proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of the
compromise dated 21.10.2019 (Annexure P-2).
Notice of motion was issued on 02.12.2019 and on 25.02.2020 both
the parties were directed to appear before the trial Court for recording their
statements in the context of genuineness of the compromise. The trial Court was
also directed to submit its report with regard to genuineness of the compromise.
Pursuant to the aforesaid order, report dated 07.03.2020 has been
received from the Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Sri Anandpur Sahib. A
1 of 3
CRM-M-51285-2019 (O&M) -2-
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 has been settled
between the parties and they have no objection in case the FIR in question is
quashed and the compromise effected between them is genuine, without any
undue influence and coercion. It is stated in the report that there are six accused.
None of the accused has been declared as proclaimed offender.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have also gone
through the case file.
After perusing the report submitted by the trial Court, this Court
finds that the matter has been amicably settled between the petitioner(s) and the
complainant(s). Since the matter has been settled and the parties have decided to
live in peace, this Court is of the view that in order to secure the ends of justice,
the criminal proceedings deserve to be quashed.
As per the Full Bench judgment of this Court in "Kulwinder Singh
and others Vs State of Punjab", 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052, it is 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.
Hon'ble the Apex Court in the case of "Gian Singh Vs. State of
Punjab and another", 2012 (4) RCR (Criminal) 543, had also 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
2 of 3
CRM-M-51285-2019 (O&M) -3-
judgment is reproduced hereinbelow:-
"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"
In view of the above, the petition is allowed and FIR No.21, dated
06.03.2014, under Sections 447, 324, 323, 506, 148, 149 (Section 325 added later
on) of IPC, registered at Police Station Sri Anandpur Sahib, District Rupnagar,
and all other consequential proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of the
compromise dated 21.10.2019 (Annexure P-2), are quashed qua the petitioners.
(AMAN CHAUDHARY)
JUDGE
January 16, 2023
M.Kamra/Mehak
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No
Whether reportable : Yes/No
3 of 3
