Punjab-Haryana High Court
Kulwinder Singh And Others vs State Of Punjab And Another on 25 April, 2024
279 2024:PHHC:056865
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-62190-2023
Date of Decision: April 25, 2024
KULWINDER SINGH AND OTHERS ........Petitioners
Versus
STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER ........Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA
Present:Mr. Rajeev Sharma, Advocate for the petitioners.
Mr. Siddharth Sandhu, AAG, Punjab.
Mr. Vikrant Duggal, Advocate for respondent No.2.
****
HARKESH MANUJA, J. (ORAL)
1. By way of present petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C.,
the petitioners pray for quashing of FIR No.62 dated 10.06.2016
registered at P.S. Koom Kalan, District Ludhiana registered under
Sections 452, 324, 427 and 34 of IPC and judgment dated 18.01.2020
passed by the learned JMIC, Ludhiana and all other subsequent
proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise dated
01.12.2023 (Annexure P-3).
2. Briefly stated, the petitioners were arrayed as accused in
the aforementioned FIR, lodged at the instance of respondent No.2-
complainant, in which, petitioners have been convicted under Sections
324, 427 and 452 of IPC. The petitioners under Sections 324 and 427
of IPC were sentenced to undergo rigourous imprisonment for a period
of 1 year each along with fine of Rs.1,000/- and in default thereof to
further undergo imprisonment for 1 month each whereas, under Section
452 of IPC, the petitioners were sentenced to undergo rigourous
imprisonment for a period of 2 years each along with fine of Rs.1,000/-
and in default thereof to further undergo rigourous imprisonment for
1 month each vide judgment/order dated 18.01.2020 passed by learned
Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Ludhiana.
3. This Court while issuing notice of motion vide order dated
11.12.2023 directed the parties to appear before trial Court for getting their
statements recorded as regards the veracity of the compromise arrived at
between them.
3. In pursuance of aforesaid order dated 11.12.2023 passed
by this Court, a report dated 06.01.2024 has been received from the
concerned Court, stating that the compromise is genuine and voluntary
and without any coercion or undue influence. No accused has been
declared as proclaimed offender.
4. Once, the compromise has been arrived at between the
parties without any pressure and respondent No.2 has no objection as
regards quashing of complaint as well as all other subsequent
proceedings arising out of the same against the petitioners; there does
not appear to be any impediment as regards quashing of present
complaint qua the petitioners. Even otherwise, in order to maintain
peace and harmony between the parties, particularly under the
circumstances wherein the alleged offences have no societal interest
involved, it would be appropriate to render complete quietus to the
aforementioned dispute by quashing the complaint on the basis of
compromise entered into between the parties.
5. The parties having settled their dispute so as to live in
peace in future, being living in the same area and doing the same
business, no useful purpose would be served by proceeding further with
the criminal proceedings. In the light of above developments, no cause
remains for the appellate Court to invest further time and effort in
adjudicating the appeal. The compromise in question is even found to
be fully in consonance with the direction issued by the Court in
Kulwinder Singh & Ors. Vs. State of Punjab 2007(3) RCR (Criminal)
1052 and Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab & Anr., 2012(4) RCR (Crl.)
543.
6. My aforesaid view is mainly dervied from the proposition of
law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of "Ram Gopal
vs. State of Madya Pradesh, 2021(4) RCR (Criminal)322. Relevant
paras 18 and 19 thereof are reproduced hereunder:-
"18. It is now a well crystalized axiom that the plenary jurisdiction of
this Court to impart complete justice under Article 142 cannot ipso
facto be limited or restricted by ordinary statutory provisions. It is also
noteworthy that even in the absence of an express provision akin to
Section 482 Cr.P.C. conferring powers on the Supreme Court to
abrogate and set aside criminal proceedings, the jurisdiction
exercisable under Article 142 of the Constitution embraces this Court
with scopius powers to quash criminal proceedings also, so as to
secure complete justice. In doing so, due regard must be given to the
over-arching objective of sentencing in the criminal justice system,
which is grounded on the sublime philosophy of maintenance of peace
of the collective and that the rationale of placing an individual behind
bars is aimed at his reformation.
19. We thus sum-up and hold that as opposed to Section 320 CrPC
where the Court is squarely guided by the compromise between the
parties in respect of offences 'compoundable' within the statutory
framework, the extraordinary power enjoined upon a High Court under
Section 482 Cr.P.C. or vested in this Court under Article 142 of the
Constitution, can be invoked beyond the metes and bounds of Section
320 Cr.P.C. Nonetheless, we reiterate that such powers of wide
amplitude ought to be exercised carefully in the context of quashing
criminal proceedings, bearing in mind: (i)Nature and effect of the
offence on the conscious of the society; (ii) Seriousness of the injury, if
any; (iii) Voluntary nature of compromise between the accused and
the victim; & (iv) Conduct of the accused persons,
prior to and after the occurrence of the purported offence and/or other
relevant considerations."
7. Applying the aforesaid proposition to the facts and
circumstances of the present case, the petitioners having settled the
dispute with the complainant, the offences committed by the petitioners
thus, stand compounded.
8. Thus, in view of the aforesaid facts, accompanied by
statements of both the parties as well as keeping in mind the law laid
down in the aforementioned judgments, FIR No.62 dated 10.06.2016
registered at P.S. Koom Kalan, District Ludhiana registered under
Sections 452, 324, 427 and 34 of IPC and judgment dated 18.01.2020
passed by the learned JMIC, Ludhiana passed by the Trial Court as
well as all the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom are hereby
quashed qua the petitioners.
25.04.2024 (HARKESH MANUJA)
Tejwinder JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No
Whether Reportable Yes/No
