Punjab-Haryana High Court
Basant Singh vs State Of Punjab And Another on 3 July, 2023
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:083057
CRM-M-19133-2023 1
2023:PHHC:083057
250
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-19133-2023
Date of decision : 03.07.2023
BASANT SINGH
....Petitioner
Versus
STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER
...Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ JAIN
Present : Mr. Rahul Garg, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Kunal Vinayak, Asstt. Advocate General, Punjab.
Mr. Lalit Goyal, Advocate for respondent No.2.
PANKAJ JAIN, J. (ORAL)
By way of present petition, the petitioner is seeking quashing
of DDR No.20 dated 02.03.2023 registered for the offences punishable
under Sections 323, 324, 506 of the Indian Penal Code in case bearing
FIR No.33 dated 26.02.2023 under Section 324, 341, 323, 34 of the
Indian Penal Code and Section 326 of IPC added subsequently at Police
Station Anandpur Sahib, District Rupnagar (Annexure P-1) on the basis
of compromise.
2. On 19.04.2023, the following order was passed :
"Present petition has been filed under Section 482 of
Cr.P.C. seeking quashing DDR No.20 dated 02.03.2023
registered under Sections 323, 324, 506 of the Indian Penal Code
1 of 6
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:083057
2023:PHHC:083057
in case bearing FIR No.33 dated 26.02.2023 under Section 324,
341, 323, 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 326 of IPC
added subsequently at Police Station Anandpur Sahib, District
Rupnagar (Annexure P-1) and all the subsequent proceedings
arising therefrom on the basis of compromise dated 6.04.2023
(Annexure P-2).
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the dispute
has been amicably settled between the private parties in terms of
the compromise (Annexure P-2).
Notice of motion. Mr. P.S. Grewal, DAG, Punjab, who is
present in the Court accepts notice on behalf of respondent No.
1-State and seeks time to file reply/status report.
Mr. Naveen Batra, Advocate has put in an appearance on
behalf of the respondent No. 2 and admitted the factum of
compromise.
In view of the above, parties are directed to appear before
the Illaqa Magistrate/trial Court to get their statement(s) recorded
with regard to compromise/settlement within a period of 30 days
from today.
The learned Illaqa Magistrate/trial Court is directed to
submit a report on or before the next date of hearing containing
the following information:-
1. Number of persons arraigned as accused in FIR;
2. Whether any accused is proclaimed offender;
3. Whether the compromise is genuine, voluntary, and
without any coercion or undue influence;
4. Whether the accused persons are involved in any other
case or not;
5. The trial Court is also directed to record the statement of
the Investigating Officer as to how many
victims/complainants are there in the FIR and apprise
this Court about the stage of proceedings?
The report of the Illaqa Magistrate/trial Court be awaited
for 03.07.2023.
Status report/reply on behalf of State be also filed on the
2 of 6
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:083057
2023:PHHC:083057
adjourned date."
3. Pursuant to the aforesaid order, report from SDJM, Sri
Anandpur Sahib dated 06.06.2023 has been received, which is taken on
record. As per the report, the Trial Court has recorded as follows:
"1. There is only one accused namely Basant Singh (petitioner befoe
the Hon'ble High Court)."
2. The accused has not been declared as proclaimed person;
3. From the above statements of the victim/injured and the accused,
this court is of the view that compromise is genuine, voluntary
and without any coercion or undue influence;
4. The accused is not involved in any other case;
5. As per statement of Investigating Officer, Deep Singh is the only
victim/complainant in the present case. The present case is still
under investigation and the final report of the investigation has
not been presented so far in this case."
4. Ld. Counsel appearing for respondent No.2 admits the fact of
parties having compromised and states that he has no objection in case the
DDR and all proceedings subsequent thereto against the petitioner are
quashed.
5. Similarly Ld. State Counsel has stated no objection in case the
FIR is quashed based upon the compromise.
6. I have heard Ld. Counsel for the parties and have carefully
gone through the records of the case.
7. After considering judgment rendered by the Apex Court in
Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab and another, 2012(10) SCC 303, State
of Madhya Pradesh vs. Laxmi Narayan and others (2019) 5 SCC 688,
3 of 6
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:083057
2023:PHHC:083057
Kulwinder Singh & others vs. State of Punjab & another, 2007 (3)
RCR (Criminal) 1052 and Ram Gopal and another vs. State of Madhya
Pradesh, 2021(4) R.C.R. (Criminal) 322 (Criminal Appeal No.1489 of
2012 decided on 29th of September, 2021), the proposition of law that
emerges from the aforesaid decisions rendered by Apex Court and this
Court is :
(a) Power u/s 482 Cr.P.C. vested with this Court is not
affected by Section 320 of the Code.
(b) However, wider the power greater the caution.
(c) The underlining principle while exercising such power
is that it can be invoked to quash the proceedings recognizing
compromise between the parties in the matters which are
overwhelmingly and predominantly of civil character like
commercial transactions or arising out of matrimonial
relationship or family disputes.
(d) The said power is not to be exercised in the
prosecutions involving heinous and serious offences of mental
depravity or offences like murder, rape, dacoity etc. as such
offences are not private in nature and have a serious impact on
society.
(e) Section 482 Cr.P.C. casts duty upon the High Court to
advance interest of justice as well. It is in recognition of this
duty casted upon the High Court, that Apex Court held that
the High Court would not refuse to quash FIR under Section
307 merely because FIR finds mention thereof. High Court
can assess nature of injuries sustained, whether such injuries
inflicted on vital/delicate parts of the body/nature of weapons
used etc.
(f) Such exercise at the hands of High Court would be
4 of 6
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:083057
2023:PHHC:083057
permissible only after the evidence is collected after
investigation and chargesheet is filed/charges framed during
the trial. Such exercise cannot be carried out while the matter
is still under investigation.
(g) While quashing FIR in non-compoundable offences
even which are of private in nature, High Court is required to
consider antecedents of the accused, conduct of the accused
and whether he was absconding or whether he has managed
the complainant to enter into a compromise.
8. Thus, keeping in view the aforesaid facts and circumstances,
this Court is of the considered opinion that it is a fit case to exercise
jurisdiction vested u/s 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the FIR as :-
(i) The present matter does not fall within the exceptions
as carved out in Laxmi Narayan's case (supra).
(ii) The offences are of private nature.
(iii) The parties have compromised.
(iv) As per the report received the compromise is said to be
voluntary in its nature.
(v) Complainant/victim has entered into compromise on
his own volition.
9. Consequently, the petition is allowed. DDR No.20 dated
02.03.2023 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 323,
324, 506 of the Indian Penal Code in case bearing FIR No.33 dated
26.02.2023 under Section 324, 341, 323, 34 of the Indian Penal Code and
Section 326 of IPC added subsequently at Police Station Anandpur Sahib,
District Rupnagar (Annexure P-1) and all proceedings arising therefrom,
5 of 6
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:083057
2023:PHHC:083057
are, hereby, quashed qua the petitioner.
July 3, 2023 (PANKAJ JAIN)
Dpr JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No
Whether reportable : Yes/No
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:083057
6 of 6
