Jagjit Singh @ Kala And Others vs State Of Punjab And Another
2023 Latest Caselaw 20188 P&H

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Jagjit Singh @ Kala And Others vs State Of Punjab And Another on 21 November, 2023

Author: Pankaj Jain

Bench: Pankaj Jain

                                                     Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:148187




CRM-M-34207-2023                                                              1
                                                                 2023:PHHC:148187


276-2
        IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                      AT CHANDIGARH


                                                 CRM-M-34207-2023
                                                 Date of decision : 21.11.2023


JAGJIT SINGH @ KALA AND OTHERS                                        ....Petitioners

                                        Versus

STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER                                         ...Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ JAIN

Present :   Mr. Nitin Kumar, Advocate for the petitioners.

            Mr. Kunal Vinayak, AAG, Punjab.

            Mr. Ankit Bhardwaj, Advocate
            for respondent No.2.

PANKAJ JAIN, J. (ORAL)

By way of present petition, the petitioners are seeking quashing

of DDR No.13 dated 28.05.2014 for the offences punishable under Sections

326/324 IPC at Police Station Majitha, District Amritsar (Annexure P-2) in

case FIR No.39 dated 04.04.2014 under Sections 324/452/148/149 IPC

(Section 326 IPC was added later) of the same police station, on the basis of

compromise.

2. On 19.07.2023, the following order was passed :-

"The present petition has been moved invoking jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of the Cross DDR bearing No. 13 dated 28.05.2014 for the offences punishable under Sections 326 and 324 IPC and FIR No. 39 dated

1 of 6

Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:148187

2023:PHHC:148187

04.04.2014 under Sections 324, 452, 148, 149 IPC (Section 326 IPC was added later) and all subsequent proceedings arising thereto on the basis of compromise. Learned Counsel for the petitioner contends that the matter already stands compromised vide Compromise Deed dated 30.06.2023 (Annexure P-3). Notice of motion. Mr. Tarun Aggarwal, Senior DAG., Punjab appears and accepts notice on behalf of respondent No.1-State. Mr. Ankit Bhardwaj, Advocate appears and accepts notice on behalf of respondent No.2 and admits the fact of there being a compromise between the parties. In view of the order dated 07.07.2023 passed by this Court in CRM-M-32308-2023, the parties are directed to appear before learned Trial Court/Duty Magistrate on 16.08.2023. On their doing so, the learned Trial Court/Duty Magistrate shall record their statements with respect to the Cross case which is subject matter of the present case and furnish its report to this Court by the next date of hearing on the following aspects:- 1. Number of persons arrayed as accused in the complaint. 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 complaint. A copy of the report be also sent to the Registrar Judicial of this Court. Needless to say that in case for any reason the statements are not recorded on the aforesaid date, the learned Trial Court/Duty Magistrate shall be at liberty to call the parties on any other date but not later than a week thereafter. To come up on 27.09.2023. "

3. Pursuant to the aforesaid order, report from JMIC, Amritsar

dated 21.08.2023 has been received, which is taken on record. As per the

report, the trial Court has recorded as follows:-

"i) There are three accused namely Jagjit Singh @ Kala, Harpreet Singh @ Preet and Nirmal Singh @ Nirmal involved in the DDR No.13 dated 28.05.20214 registered under Sections

2 of 6

Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:148187

2023:PHHC:148187

326 and 324 of IPC at Police Station Majitha.

ii) As per statement of Investigating Officer SI Jang Bahadur, accused involved in the above said DDR are not declared as proclaimed offender.

iii) As per statements of both the parties, compromise is genuine voluntarily and out of free will of the parties.

iv) No accused is involved in any other FIR, except the present case as per statement of Investigating Officer.

v) As per statement of Investigating Officer, there is only one complainant/victim namely Sukhwinder Kaur is involved 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

FIR and all proceedings subsequent thereto against the petitioners 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,

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

3 of 6

Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:148187

2023:PHHC:148187

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 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

4 of 6

Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:148187

2023:PHHC:148187

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.13 dated

28.05.2014 for the offences punishable under Sections 326/324 IPC at

Police Station Majitha, District Amritsar (Annexure P-2) in case FIR No.39

dated 04.04.2014 under Sections 324/452/148/149 IPC (Section 326 IPC

was added later) and all proceedings arising therefrom, are, hereby, quashed

qua the petitioners.

November 21, 2023                                      (Pankaj Jain)
Dpr                                                       Judge



                                  5 of 6

Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:148187

2023:PHHC:148187

Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No

Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:148187

6 of 6