Thursday, 21, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Sukhwinder Singh And Ors vs State Of Punjab And Anr
2024 Latest Caselaw 10501 P&H

Citation : 2024 Latest Caselaw 10501 P&H
Judgement Date : 1 July, 2024

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Sukhwinder Singh And Ors vs State Of Punjab And Anr on 1 July, 2024

                                        Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:081086



CRM-M-24531-2024(O&M)
                                  1




            IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                             AT CHANDIGARH

252                                             CRM-M-24531-2024(O&M)
                                                Date of Decision: 01.07.2024


SUKHWINDER SINGH AND ORS                                     ....Petitioners

                                      VERSUS

STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANR                                      ....Respondents

CORAM : HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA

Present :     Mr. Vikrant Vij, Advocate for the petitioners.

              Mr. Satjot Singh, AAG, Punjab.

              Mr. Gursimran Singh Bawa, Advocate for respondent no.2.

MANISHA BATRA, J. (Oral)

The present petition has been filed under Section 482 of Code

of Criminal Procedure for quashing of FIR No.0025 dated 11.02.2023 under

Sections 420, 120-B of IPC registered at Police Station City Tarn Taran,

District Tarn Taran and all the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom, on

the basis of affidavit dated 14.03.2024 (Annexure P-2).

2. The aforementioned FIR had been lodged by respondent

No.2/complainant and investigation was commenced thereon.

3. It is submitted by counsel for the petitioners that a compromise

has been arrived at between the parties and they have resolved their inter se

dispute, which was reduced into writing as affidavit dated 14.03.2024

annexed with the present petition as Annexure P-2.

1 of 4

Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:081086

CRM-M-24531-2024(O&M)

4. On the basis of said compromise, the petitioners have prayed

for quashing of the aforesaid FIR and all the subsequent proceedings on the

ground that continuation of such proceedings would be a futile exercise.

5. This Court vide order dated 16.05.2024 had directed the parties

to appear before the Illaqa/Duty Magistrate for recording their statements

with regard to the genuineness of the compromise stated to have been

arrived at between them. The Illaqa/Duty Magistrate was also directed to

send his/her report along with the said statements.

6. Pursuant to the aforesaid order, the learned Chief Judicial

Magistrate, Tarn Taran has sent report vide endorsement No.941 dated

18.06.2024 to this Court along with original statement of respondent No.2

and statements of the petitioners recorded on 27.05.2024 and statement of

Investigating Officer ASI-Gurbhej Singh as recorded on 29.05.2024.

7. On the basis of these statements, it is submitted by learned

Magistrate that the compromise effected between the parties is genuine, out

of free Will and without any pressure or coercion. It is also mentioned in the

report that apart from the petitioners, there is no other accused in the FIR

and that the accused have not been declared proclaimed persons in this case.

8. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and besides

perusing the report by learned Judicial Magistrate, have also perused the

record.

9. It is well settled that the High Court has power to allow

compounding of a non-compoundable offence and quash the prosecution

2 of 4

Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:081086

CRM-M-24531-2024(O&M)

under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. where it feels that the same is required to

prevent the abuse of process of law or otherwise to secure the ends of

justice. Such power is not confined to matrimonial disputes alone. In this

regard, reference can be made to a Full Bench judgment of this Court in

Kulwinder Singh and others v. State of Punjab, 2007 (3) RCR

(Criminal) 1052. It is equally settled position of law that the power of High

Court in quashing criminal proceedings or FIR or complaint in exercise of

its inherent jurisdiction is of wide plenitude with no statutory limitation.

Such power can certainly be exercised in cases relating to offences arising

out of matrimony relating to dowry etc. or the family disputes where the

wrong is basically private or personal in nature and the parties have resolved

their entire dispute. The High Court is required to consider whether it would

be unfair or contrary to the interest of justice to continue with the criminal

proceedings or continuation of criminal proceedings would tantamount to

abuse of process of law and whether to secure the ends of justice, it is

appropriate to put an end to the criminal case and if the answer to such

question is in affirmative, then the High Court is well within its jurisdiction

to quash the criminal proceedings. Reference in this context can be made to

Hon'ble Apex Court judgments cited as Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and

another, 2012 (4) RCR (Criminal) 543 and Narinder Singh and others

vs. State of Punjab and another, 2014 (6) SCC 466.

10. In view of the proposition as settled in the aforementioned

cases, this Court finds that continuation of proceedings would be an abuse

3 of 4

Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:081086

CRM-M-24531-2024(O&M)

process of the Court in the facts and circumstances of the present case which

squarely falls within the ambit and parameters settled by judicial precedents

and that allowing and accepting the prayer of the petitioners by quashing of

the FIR would be securing the ends of justice, which is primarily the object

of legislature enacted under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. Accordingly, the petition

is allowed and the FIR No.0025 dated 11.02.2023 under Sections 420, 120-B

of IPC registered at Police Station City Tarn Taran, District Tarn Taran and

all the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom, are ordered to be quashed

qua the petitioners on the basis of affidavit dated 14.03.2024 (Annexure

P-2).

11. Needless to say that the parties shall remain bound by the terms

and conditions of the compromise and statements as recorded before learned

Judicial Magistrate.

( MANISHA BATRA ) 01.07.2024 JUDGE Deepak Patwal

1. Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No

2. Whether reportable : Yes/No

4 of 4

 
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 : IJJ

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : MAIMS

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter