Punjab-Haryana High Court
Nirmal Singh And Others vs State Of Punjab And Another on 6 September, 2023
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:117609
263 2023:PHHC:117609
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-25176-2023 (O&M)
Date of decision : 06.09.2023
NIRMAL SINGH AND OTHERS ....Petitioners
Versus
STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER ....Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ JAIN
Present : Ms. Meenu, Advocate for the petitioners.
Mr. Kunal Vinayak, AAG, Punjab.
Ms. Ritu Pathak, Advocate for respondent No.2.
PANKAJ JAIN, J. (ORAL)
By way of present petition, the petitioners are seeking quashing
of FIR No.05 dated 23.02.2019, registered for the offences punishable
under Sections 420 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, registered at
Police Station NRI District Moga (Annexure P-1) on the basis of
compromise.
2. On 18.05.2023, the following order was passed :-
"Prayer in this petition is for quashing of the FIR No.05
dated 23.02.2019, under Sections 420 and 120-B of the Indian
Penal Code, 1860 (for short 'the IPC'), registered at Police Station
NRI District Moga (Annexure P-1) and all other subsequent
proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of the compromise dated
02.05.2023 (Annexure P-2) entered into between the parties.
Notice of motion.
On the asking of the Court, Mr. Dhruv Dayal, Additional
A.G., Punjab, accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State.
1 of 5
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:117609
2023:PHHC:117609
Ms. Ritu Pathak, Advocate, has put in appearance on behalf
of respondent No.2 and has filed her Power of Attorney, which is
taken on record.
She also admits the factum of compromise arrived at
between the parties.
List on 06.09.2023.
Meanwhile, the parties are directed to appear before the
learned trial Court/Area Magistrate on 31.05.2023 or any other
convenient date to the Court and to get their statements recorded
regarding the compromise.
The trial Court/Area Magistrate is directed to submit a
report on or before the next date of hearing containing the
following information:
1. Number of persons arrayed as accused,
2. Whether any accused is/are proclaimed offender/s
or proclaimed person/s.
3. Whether the compromise is genuine, voluntary and
without any coercion or undue influence,
4. Whether the accused persons are involved in any
other FIR/criminal case.
5. The trial Court is also directed to record the
statement of the Investigating Officer with regard to
the number of victims/ complainants and the
accused in the present case."
3. Pursuant to the aforesaid order, report from Addl. Chief
Judicial Magistrate, Moga dated 03.06.2023 has been received, which is
taken on record. As per the report, the trial Court has recorded as follows:-
"It is further submitted as under:-
I. As per the statement of above said Investigating Officer,
there are total three accused namely Nirmal Singh, Chanan
Singh and Gurmeet Singh in the FIR no.05 dated 23.02.2019
registered under Sections 420 and 120-B of IPC at P.S NRI,
Moga.
II. As per statement of above said Investigating Officer, no
accused is proclaimed offender in the above said FIR.
III. As per statements of parties, compromise effected
between them is genuine, voluntarily and without any coercion
2 of 5
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:117609
2023:PHHC:117609
or undue influence.
IV. As per statement of above said Investigating Officer,
accused Nirmal Singh and Gurmeet Singh are not involved in
any other FIR/criminal case. Further, accused Chanan Singh is
also involved in FIR no.83 dated 14.08.2017 registered under
Sections 420, 406, 341, 506, 120-B of IPC at P.S Ajitwal, Moga.
V. As per statement of above said Investigating Officer as
well as Kulwinder Kaur power of attorney holder of complainant
Daljit Singh, there is only one victim/complainant namely Daljit
Singh in the above said FIR. "
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
2012 decided on 29th of September, 2021), the proposition of law that
3 of 5
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:117609
2023:PHHC:117609
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
even which are of private in nature, High Court is required to
4 of 5
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:117609
2023:PHHC:117609
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. FIR No.05 dated
23.02.2019, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 420 and
120-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, registered at Police Station NRI
District Moga (Annexure P-1) and all proceedings arising therefrom, are,
hereby, quashed qua the petitioners.
10. Pending application, if any, shall also stand disposed off.
September 06, 2023 (Pankaj Jain)
Dpr Judge
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No
Whether reportable : Yes/No
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:117609
5 of 5
