Punjab-Haryana High Court
M/S Maman Chand Hukam Chand Pvt. Ltd. And ... vs State Of Punjab And Another on 2 August, 2024
Author: Sandeep Moudgil
Bench: Sandeep Moudgil
CRM-M-30878-2024 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
(237) CRM-M-30878-2024
Date of Decision : 02.08.2024
M/s Maman Chand Hukam Chand Pvt. Ltd. and others
...Petitioners
Versus
State of Punjab and another ... Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MOUDGIL
Present: Mr. Atul Goyal, Advocate and
Mr. Brajesh Kumar Kaundal, Advocate
for the petitioners.
Mr. Jaspal Singh Guru, AAG, Punjab.
Mr. Birinder Pal, Advocate for respondent No.2.
38 26 3k 2
SANDEEP MOUDGIL, J.(ORAL)
This is a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of
FIR No.104, dated 14.03.2024, under Sections 420 and 120-B of the Indian
Penal Code, 1860 and Sections 103 and 104 of Trade Marks Act, 1999
registered at Police Station Sadar City Barnala (Annexure P-1), with all the
consequential proceedings arising therefrom qua petitioners, on the basis of
compromise dated 19.06.2024 (Annexure P-2).
Mr. Birinder Pal, Advocate appears on behalf of respondent No.2
and files vakalatname in Court today, same is taken on record subject to just
exceptions.
During the pendency of the dispute, the parties have
compromised the matter and filed the present petition for quashing of FIR.
CRM-M-30878-2024
Vide order dated 01.07.2024, parties were directed to appear
before the [llaqa Magistrate/Trial Court and report with regard to the
genuineness of the compromise was called for.
The report dated 23.07.2024 has been received from Chief
Judicial Magistrate, Barnala stating that the parties have entered 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 non compoundable 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
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
2024.08.06 08:47 in society. Resolution of a dispute by way of a compromise
order/judgment
CRM-M-30878-2024
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."
The legal principles as laid down for quashing of the judgment
were also approved by Hon'ble the 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 Hon'ble the 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.104, dated 14.03.2024, under Sections
420 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Sections 103 and 104 of
Trade Marks Act, 1999 registered at Police Station Sadar City Barnala
(Annexure P-1), with all the consequential proceedings arising therefrom is
quashed qua petitioners, on the basis of compromise dated 19.06.2024
(Annexure P-2).
The present petition is hereby allowed.
(SANDEEP MOUDGIL)
JUDGE
August 02, 2024
Manpreet
MANPREET SINGH Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No
2024.08.06 08:47
I attest to the accuracy and Whether reportable : Yes/N: oO
authenticity of this
order/judgment
