Punjab-Haryana High Court
Sonia Kamboj And Ors vs State Of Punjab And Another on 29 April, 2024
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:057938
CRM-M-2376-2024 (O&M) -1- 2024:PHHC:057938
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
227-II CRM-M-2376-2024 (O&M)
Date of Decision:29.04.2024
Sonia Kamboj and others .... Petitioners
Versus
State of Punjab and another .... Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA
Present: - Mr. Davinder Singh Khurana, Advocate
for the petitioners.
Mr. S.S.Chahal, A.A.G., Punjab.
Mr. Rajat Dogra, Advocate
for respondent No.2/complainant.
NIDHI GUPTA, J. (ORAL)
The petitioners have filed the present petition under Section
482 Cr.P.C., for quashing of FIR No. 123 dated 03.11.2023, under
Section 324, 323, 511 and 34 IPC at Police Station Cantt., Ferozepur
(Annexure P-1) and all the consequential proceedings arising therefrom,
on the basis of compromise dated 29.12.2023 (Annexure P-2) effected
between the parties.
Pursuant to the order dated 16.01.2024 passed by a
co-ordinate Bench of this Court, the parties appeared before the learned
Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Ferozepur, to get their statements recorded.
Learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Ferozepur, has submitted her
report along with statements of the parties vide letter dated 19.02.2024
1 of 4
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:057938
CRM-M-2376-2024 (O&M) -2- 2024:PHHC:057938
duly forwarded by the learned District and Sessions Judge, Ferozepur on
20.02.2024.
A perusal of the above said report would show that the
petitioners and respondent No. 2 have appeared and suffered statements
with respect to the compromise, which have been found to be valid,
genuine, voluntary and without any coercion or undue influence.
Learned counsel for the petitioners contends that it is a case
of version and cross-version wherein the parties have amicably arrived at
an amicable settlement between themselves. Learned counsel further
submits that the present FIR emanates from the matrimonial dispute
between the parties. He further submits that as per report, all the accused
are party to the compromise and they have never been declared as
proclaimed offenders. It is further submitted that there is one cross case
arising from FIR No. 202 dated 04.12.2022 registered under Sections
406, 498A IPC and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 at Police
Station City Jalalabad, District Fazilka against the
complainant/respondent No. 2 and his family members on the statement
of the wife/petitioner No.1 herein. Vide order of even date passed in
CRM-M-1826-2024 titled as Sukhdev Singh Jossan and others vs.
State of Punjab and another, the FIR No. 202 dated 04.12.2022 has also
been quashed.
Learned State counsel has stated that he has 'no objection'
in case the FIR in question is quashed on the basis of compromise qua
the petitioners.
This Court has heard the learned counsel for the parties and
has perused the file.
2 of 4
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:057938
CRM-M-2376-2024 (O&M) -3- 2024:PHHC:057938
After perusing the report submitted by the learned Judicial
Magistrate, 1st Class, Ferozepur, this Court finds that the matter has been
amicably settled between the petitioners and respondent No. 2. Since the
matter has been settled and the parties have decided to live in peace, this
Court feels that in order to secure the ends of justice, the criminal
proceedings deserve to be quashed.
As per the Full Bench judgment of this Court in "Kulwinder
Singh and others Vs State of Punjab", 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052,
it is held that High Court has power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to allow
the compounding of non-compoundable offence and quash the
proceedings where the High Court is of the opinion that the same is
required to prevent the abuse of the process of law or otherwise to secure
the ends of justice. This power of quashing is not confined to
matrimonial disputes alone.
Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of "Gian Singh Vs. State of
Punjab and another", 2012 (4) RCR (Criminal) 543, had also observed
that in order to secure the ends of justice or to prevent the abuse of
process of Court, inherent power can be used by this Court to quash
criminal proceedings in which a compromise has been effected. The
relevant portion of para 57 of the said judgment is reproduced here-in-
below:-
"57. The position that emerges from the above discussion
can be summarised thus: the power of the High Court in
quashing a criminal proceeding or FIR or complaint in
exercise of its inherent jurisdiction is distinct and different
from the power given to a criminal court for compounding
the offences under Section 320 of the Code. Inherent power
is of wide plenitude with no statutory limitation but it has to
be exercised in accord with the guideline engrafted in such
power viz; (i) to secure the ends of justice or (ii) to
3 of 4
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:057938
CRM-M-2376-2024 (O&M) -4- 2024:PHHC:057938
prevent abuse of the process of any Court."
In view of what has been discussed here-in-above, this
petition is allowed and FIR No. 123 dated 03.11.2023, under Section
324, 323, 511 and 34 IPC at Police Station Cantt., Ferozepur (Annexure
P-1) and all the consequential proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis
of compromise dated 29.12.2023 (Annexure P-2), are ordered to be
quashed qua the petitioners.
Pending application, if any, stands disposed of.
29.04.2024 ( NIDHI GUPTA )
Divyanshi JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No
Whether Reportable Yes/No
4 of 4
