Tuesday, 02, Jun, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Yatin Alias Mithu And Another vs State Of Haryana And Another
2024 Latest Caselaw 8907 P&H

Citation : 2024 Latest Caselaw 8907 P&H
Judgement Date : 26 April, 2024

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Yatin Alias Mithu And Another vs State Of Haryana And Another on 26 April, 2024

Author: Sandeep Moudgil

Bench: Sandeep Moudgil

                                      Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:057420



231                                                 2024:PHHC:057420

            IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                         AT CHANDIGARH

                                        CRM-M-9094-2024
                                        DECIDED ON: 26.04.2024

YATIN ALIAS MITHU AND ANOTHER
                                                    .....PETITIONERS

                                  VERSUS

STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER
                                                    .....RESPONDENTS

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MOUDGIL

Present:    Mr. G.S. Rawat, Advocate
            for the petitioners.

            Mr. Gurbir Singh Dhillon, AAG, Haryana.

            Ms. Komal Preet Kaur, Advocate
            for respondent No.2.

SANDEEP MOUDGIL, J (ORAL)

This is a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of FIR

No.360, dated 03.07.2017 (Annexure P-1), under Sections 323, 324, 326,

341, 427, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, registered at Police

Station Pehowa, District Kurukshetra with all the consequential proceedings

arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise (Annexure P-2).

During the pendency of the dispute, the parties have

compromised the matter and filed the present petition for quashing of FIR.

Vide order dated 20.02.2024, parties were directed to appear

before the Illaqa Magistrate/Trial Court and report with regard to the

genuineness of the compromise was called for.

The report dated 12.03.2024 has been received from Sub

Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Pehowa, stating that the parties have entered

1 of 3

Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:057420

into a compromise, which is genuine, voluntary and without any coercion or

undue influence.

Full Bench of this Court in Kulwinder Singh and others vs.

State of Punjab, 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052, has held:-

"The only inevitable conclusion from the above discussion is that there is no statutory bar under the Cr.P.C. which can affect the inherent power of this Court under Section 482. Further, the same cannot be limited to matrimonial cases alone and the Court has the wide power to quash the proceedings even in noncompoundable offences notwithstanding the bar under Section 320 of the Cr.P.C., in order to prevent the abuse of law and to secure the ends of justice. The power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. is to be exercised Ex-Debitia Justitia to prevent an abuse of process of Court. There can neither be an exhaustive list nor the defined para-meters to enable a High Court to invoke or exercise its inherent powers. It will always depend upon the facts and circumstances of each case. The power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. has no limits. However, the High Court will exercise it sparingly and with utmost care and caution. The exercise of power has to be with circumspection and restraint. The Court is a vital and an extra-ordinary effective instrument to maintain and control social order. The Courts play role of paramount importance in achieving peace, harmony and ever- lasting congeniality in society. Resolution of a dispute by way of a compromise between two warring groups, therefore, should attract the immediate and prompt attention of a Court which should endeavour to give full effect to the same unless such compromise is abhorrent to lawful composition of the society or would promote savagery."

2 of 3

Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:057420

The legal principles as laid down for quashing of the judgment

were also approved by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of 'Gian

Singh Versus State of Punjab and another,(2012) 10 SCC 303'.

Furthermore, the broad principles for exercising the powers under Section

482 were summarized by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of

'Parbatbhai Aahir @ Parbatbhai Bhimsinhbhai Karmur and others versus

State of Gujarat and another" (2017) 9 SCC 641'.

It is evident that in view of the amicable resolution of the issues

amongst the parties, no useful purpose would be served by continuation of

the proceedings. The furtherance of the proceedings is likely to be a waste of

judicial time and there appears to be no chances of conviction.

In view of above, FIR No.No.360, dated 03.07.2017 (Annexure

P-1), under Sections 323, 324, 326, 341, 427, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal

Code, 1860, registered at Police Station Pehowa, District Kurukshetra, with

all the consequential proceedings arising therefrom, is quashed qua the

petitioners, on the basis of compromise (Annexure P-2).

The present petition is hereby allowed.




                                                (SANDEEP MOUDGIL)
26.04.2024                                            JUDGE
Poonam Negi


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




                                       3 of 3

 

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : MAIMS

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter