Punjab-Haryana High Court
Davinder Singh & Others vs State Of Punjab on 11 March, 2024
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:035544
2024:PHHC: 035544
CRA-S-4284-SB-2016 (O&M) --1--
399-a IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
CRA-S-4284-SB-2016 (O&M)
DATE OF DECISION:-11.03.2024
Davinder Singh and others ...Appellants.
Vs.
State of Punjab ...Respondent..
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA
Present: Mr. Harpreet Puri, Advocate for
Mr. C.M. Munjal, Advocate for the appellants.
Mr. Athar Ahmed, DAG, Punjab.
Mr. Satyam Arora, Advocate,
for the complainant.
****
HARKESH MANUJA, J. (ORAL)
1. By way of present appeal, challenge has been laid to the judgment
of conviction and order of sentence dated 03.11.2016 passed by the court of
learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sri Muktsar Sahib, whereby the
appellants were convicted and sentenced to the following effect:-
Sr. Name of accused Section Sentence Fine In default
No. of
payment
of fine
1 Davinder Singh 323 IPC RI for 6 Rs.1000/- 01 month
months
2 Gurjeet Singh 325 IPC RI for 3 Rs.5000/- 03 months
years
3 Gonny @ Kamaljit 323 IPC RI 6 months Rs.1000/- 1 month
Singh
4 Harjit Singh 323 IPC RI 6 months Rs.1000/- 01 month
5 Nishan Singh 323 IPC RI 6 months Rs.1000/- 01 month
2. Briefly stating, in the present case, appellants were arrayed as
1 of 5
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:035544
2024:PHHC: 035544
CRA-S-4284-SB-2016 (O&M) --2--
accused in cross version case bearing DDR No.18 under Sections 323, 148,
149 IPC recorded in FIR No.46, dated 13.05.2014, registered under Sections
308, 325, 148 and 149 IPC, Police Station Lambi, District Sri Muktsar
Sahib at the instance of victim/complainant, with the averments that the
appellants inflicted injuries upon the complainant party. Finding a prima
facie case, charges under Sections 325, 323, 148 read with Section 149 and
447 IPC, were framed against the appellants, to which, the accused pleaded
not guilty and claimed trial.
3. The Trial Court vide judgment of conviction and order of
sentence dated 03.11.2016, convicted and sentenced the appellants as
mentioned above.
4. Aggrieved thereof, the appellants-accused filed present appeal.
The appeal was admitted and sentence of the appellant was suspended vide
order dated 13.12.2016 passed by this Court.
5. During the pendency of instant appeal, a compromise has been
effected between the parties, who happened to be co-villagers and in
pursuance of last order dated 15.05.2023 passed by this Court, whereby
parties were directed to appear before the Trial Court for getting their
statements recorded as regards the veracity of compromise arrived at
between them, a report dated 17.07.2023 has been received from the
concerned Court, stating that the compromise which has been entered into
by the parties is genuine, voluntary and without any coercion or undue
influence. No accused has been declared as proclaimed offender.
6. In view of the above noted subsequent development, learned
counsel for the appellant submits that the parties having settled their
disputes in order to bury their differences being co-villagers, the cross-
2 of 5
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:035544
2024:PHHC: 035544
CRA-S-4284-SB-2016 (O&M) --3--
version case in question be thus, quashed by permitting the parties to
compound the offences under Sections 325, 323, 148 read with Section 149
and 447 IPC. For the said purpose, learned counsel for the appellants places
reliance upon judgment of this court passed in "Kulwinder Singh and
others vs. State of Punjab", 2007(3) RCR (Criminal) 1052 and "Gian
Singh vs. State of Punjab and another", 2012(4) RCR (Crl.)543.
7. In response, learned counsel representing complainant, accepting
the factum of compromise deed dated 21.12.2018 (Annexure P-1), raises no
objection in quashing of cross-version case as mentioned above as well as
other proceedings arising out of the same.
8. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the
paper book.
9. The parties being co-villagers, having settled their disputes so as
to maintain peace and harmony and also for the betterment and safety of
their generations to come, no useful purpose would be served by proceeding
further with the criminal proceedings. In the light of above developments, it
is rather in the interest of both the parties to render a complete quietus to the
criminal proceedings and thus, in terms of settlement no cause remains for
this Court to invest further time and effort in adjudicating this appeal on
merits. My aforesaid view is mainly dervied from the proposition of law
laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of "Ram Gopal vs. State
of Madya Pradesh, 2021(4) RCR (Criminal)322. Relevant paras 18 and 19
thereof are reproduced hereunder:-
"18. It is now a well crystalized axiom that the plenary
jurisdiction of this Court to impart complete justice under Article
142 cannot ipso facto be limited or restricted by ordinary statutory
provisions. It is also noteworthy that even in the absence of an express
3 of 5
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:035544
2024:PHHC: 035544
CRA-S-4284-SB-2016 (O&M) --4--
provision akin to Section 482 Cr.P.C. conferring powers on the
Supreme Court to abrogate and set aside criminal proceedings, the
jurisdiction exercisable under Article 142 of the Constitution
embraces this Court with scopious powers to quash criminal
proceedings also, so as to secure complete justice. In doing so, due
regard must be given to the over-arching objective of sentencing in the
criminal justice system, which is grounded on the sublime philosophy
of maintenance of peace of the collective and that the rationale of
placing an individual behind bars is aimed at his reformation.
19. We thus sumup and hold that as opposed to Section 320
Cr.P.C. where the Court is squarely guided by the compromise
between the parties in respect of offences 'compoundable' within the
statutory framework, the extraordinary power enjoined upon a High
Court underSection 482Cr.P.C. or vested in this Court under Article
142 of the Constitution, can be invoked beyond the metes and bounds
of Section 320 Cr.P.C. Nonetheless, we reiterate that such powers of
wide amplitude ought to be exercised carefully in the context of
quashing criminal proceedings, bearing in mind: (i) Nature and effect
of the offence on the conscious of the society; (ii) Seriousness of the
injury, if any; (iii) Voluntary nature of compromise between the
accused and the victim; & (iv) Conduct of the accused persons, prior
to and after the occurrence of the purported offence and/or other
relevant considerations."
10. Thus, in view of the above as well as keeping in mind the law laid
down in the aforementioned judgments, the present appeal is allowed. DDR
No.18, under Sections 323, 148, 149 IPC recorded in FIR No.46, dated
13.05.2014, registered under Sections 308, 325, 148 and 149 IPC, Police
Station Lambi, District Sri Muktsar Sahib along with all subsequent
proceedings arising therefrom including the judgment of conviction and
order of sentence dated 03.11.2016, are hereby set aside qua the appellants,
on the basis of compromise arrived at between the parties on 21.12.2018
(Annexure A-1) resultantly, appellants-accused stand acquitted subject to
payment of costs of Rs.50,000/- to be deposited by the appellants with Poor
Patient Welfare Fund, PGIMER, Chandigarh, within a period of two weeks
4 of 5
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:035544
2024:PHHC: 035544
CRA-S-4284-SB-2016 (O&M) --5--
from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.
Pending application(s), if any, shall also stands disposed of.
11.03.2024 (HARKESH MANUJA)
sonika JUDGE
whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No
whether reportable: Yes/No
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:035544
5 of 5
