Punjab-Haryana High Court
Sanjeev Kumar @ Sanjay Kumar vs State Of Punjab And Another on 5 August, 2024
Author: Sandeep Moudgil
Bench: Sandeep Moudgil
267
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-44548-2022
Date of Decision: August 05, 2024
SANJEEV KUMAR @ SANJAY KUMAR ....Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER ....Respondent(s)
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MOUDGIL
Present: Mr. Harmanpreet S. Mander, Advocate
for the petitioner.
Mr. J.S. Rattu, DAG, Punjab.
None for respondent No.2.
****
SANDEEP MOUDGIL, J.(ORAL)
This is a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of FIR
No.134, dated 15.11.2019, under Sections 406, 419, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471,
474, 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, registered at Police Station
Mullanpur, Punjab at Mohali (Annexure P-1), with all the consequential
proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise/affidavit dated
17.09.2022 (Annexure P-3).
During the pendency of the dispute, the parties have
compromised the matter and filed the present petition for quashing of FIR.
Vide order dated 02.07.2024, 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 24.07.2024 phas been received from Judicial
Magistrate 1st Class, Kharar, 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
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."
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.134, dated 15.11.2019, under
Sections 406, 419, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 474, 120-B of the Indian Penal
Code, 1860, registered at Police Station Mullanpur, Punjab at Mohali
(Annexure P-1), with all the consequential proceedings arising therefrom, is
quashed qua the petitioner, on the basis of compromise/affidavit dated
17.09.2022 (Annexure P-3).
The present petition is hereby allowed.
(SANDEEP MOUDGIL)
JUDGE
05.08.2024
Sangeeta
Whether reasoned/speaking: Yes/No
Whether reportable: Yes/No
