Punjab-Haryana High Court
Ragwant Singh vs State Of Punjab And Others on 4 July, 2024
Author: Kirti Singh
Bench: Kirti Singh
CRM-M-19983-2023
285
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-19983-2023
Date of Decision : 04.07.2024
Ragwant Singh
see Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab and others
seve Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE KIRTI SINGH
Present: Mr. Varinder Basa, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. G.S. Dhaliwal, AAG, Punjab .
Mr. Sanjeet Tank, Advocate
for respondent Nos. 2 and 3.
KIRTI SINGH, J.(Oral)
1. The present petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for
quashing of FIR No.74, dated 14.10.2016, registered under Section 420 IPC at
Police Station Sekhwan, District Batala, Gurdaspur, and all other consequential
proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of the compromise dated 12.01.2023
(Annexure P-2).
2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and also gone through the case
file.
3. This Court vide order dated 12.09.2023, directed the parties to
appear before the trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate for recording their statements with
regard to the compromise.
4. Pursuant to the aforesaid order, report dated 23.11.2023 has been
received from the Judicial Magistrate 1 Class-cum-CJJD, Batala. A perusal of
KAPIL
2024.07.04 18:11
| attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
CRM-M-19983-2023
the said report reveals that statements of the concerned persons have been
recorded in the present case, who have stated that the matter has been settled
between them and they have no objection in case the FIR in question is quashed.
The compromise effected between them is genuine, without any undue influence
and coercion. It is stated in the report that there are two accused. None of them
has been declared as proclaimed offender and are not involved in any other FIR.
5. The Full Bench of this Court in Kulwinder Singh and others vs.
State of Punjab, 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052, held that High Court has power
under Section 482 CrP.C. to allow the compounding of non-compoundable
offence and quash the prosecution where the High Court is of the view that the
same was 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.
6. Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the case of Gian Singh vs. State of
Punjab and another, 2012 (4) RCR (Criminal) 543, had 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 reads thus:-
"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.
KAPIL
2024.07.04 18:11
| attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
CRM-M-19983-2023
Inherent power is of wide plenitude with no statutory limitation but
it has to be exercised in accord with the guideline engrafied in such
power viz; (i) to secure the ends of justice or (ii) to prevent abuse of
the process of any Court.
XXX XXX XXX, "
7. In view of the afore-referred judgments, perusing the report of the
trial Court regarding amicable settlement between the petitioners and the
complainant, this Court finds that quashing the FIR will accord a quietus to all
disputes between the parties and it is in the interest of both sides to bury the
hatchet and lead a peaceful life. Thus, no useful purpose would be served in
continuing the proceedings and in order to secure the ends of justice, the criminal
proceedings in the present case deserve to be quashed.
8. Resultantly, the present petition is allowed and FIR No.74, dated
14.10.2016, registered under Section 420 IPC at Police Station Sekhwan, District
Batala, Gurdaspur, and all other consequential proceedings are quashed qua the
petitioner on the basis of the compromise dated 12.01.2023 (Annexure P-2).
(KIRTI SINGH)
04.07.2024 JUDGE
Kapil
Whether speaking/treasoned? Yes/No
Whether reportable? Yes/No
KAPIL
2024.07.04 18:11
| attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
