Punjab-Haryana High Court
Nirvail Singh Alias Nirvair Singh And ... vs State Of Punjab And Others on 14 March, 2024
2024:PHHC:037046
CRM-M-6272-2024
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
298-A
CRM-M-6272-2024
Date of Decision:-14.03.2024
Nirvail Singh@Nirvair Singh and Anr.
......Petitioners
Versus
State of Punjab and Ors.
......Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK JAIN
****
Present: Mr. Navjot Narang, Advocate for
Mr. Rajat Dogra, Advocate for petitioners.
Mr. Rajinder Singh Bhatta, DAG, Punjab.
Mr. Sidharth, Advocate for
Mr.Karanjeet Singh Brar, Advocate
for respondents No.2 and 3.
****
ALOK JAIN, J. (Oral)
1. The instant petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
seeking quashing of Rapat No.59 dated 22.10.2021, under Sections 307,
and 34 of IPC, 1860 and Sections 25 and 27 of Arms Act, 1959 arising
out of cross version case of FIR No.143 dated 28.08.2021, under Sections
307, 323 and 34 of IPC and Sections 25 and 27 of Arms Act, 1959,
registered at Police Station Sadar Ferozepur, District Ferozepur and
subsequent proceeding arising therefrom on the basis of compromise dated
19.10.2023 (Annexure P-3).
2. Keeping in view the fact that the parties entered into a
settlement, this Court vide order dated 06.02.2024 directed the parties to
appear before the Illaqa Magistrate/trial Court for getting their statements
recorded in that regard. Pursuant thereto, a report dated 05.03.2024 has
2024:PHHC:037046
CRM-M-6272-2024
been received from Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ferozepur
stating that the compromise arrived at between the parties is voluntary and
the same is without any pressure, coercion or undue influence.
3. Learned State counsel and learned counsel appearing on behalf
of respondents No.2 and 3 admit the factum of compromise and submit that
they have no objection in quashing of the FIR on that basis.
4. Perusal of the aforesaid report establishes that the parties have
amicably settled their dispute, and continuance of criminal proceedings in
such a situation will be an exercise in futility, as the chances of conviction
are bleak. The power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. can be exercised in such
matters. It has been held by Supreme Court of India in cases Gian Singh v.
State of Punjab and another 2012(10) SCC 303 and Narinder Singh and
others v. State of Punjab and another 2014(6) SCC 406 that criminal cases
having overwhelmingly civil character, particularly those arising out of
commercial transactions or matrimonial relationships or family disputes,
should be quashed when the parties have resolved the disputes among
themselves in a bona fide manner.
5. 5. The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of "State of
Madhya Pradesh Vs. Laxmi Narayan" (2019) 5 SCC 688, has upheld that
the High Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. can quash the criminal
proceedings in respect of non compoundable offences which are private in
nature and do not have serious impact on society.
6. More so, the trial would also be a futile exercise as there is no
cogent evidence to reach the conviction. Although the last part of the
argument is not sustainable, as the Courts are well within its powers to
2024:PHHC:037046
CRM-M-6272-2024
proceed in the matter with the evidence available and merely because the
parties have compromised would not be a ground, the trial would be
futility, however, considering the other aspect that the future of the
daughter of the petitioner will be capitalized.
7. Keeping in view the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court
in the aforesaid judgment, the present petition stands allowed and Rapat
No.59 dated 22.10.2021, under Sections 307, and 34 of IPC, 1860 and
Sections 25 and 27 of Arms Act, 1959 as cross version case of FIR
No.143 dated 28.08.2021, under Sections 307, 323 and 34 of IPC and
Sections 25 and 27 of Arms Act, 1959, registered at Police Station Sadar
Ferozepur, District Ferozepur and subsequent proceeding arising
therefrom, are hereby quashed qua the petitioners subject to costs of
Rs.25,000/- to be paid by each of the petitioner and within a period of two
weeks from today in the account of the Poor Patients Welfare Fund,
PGIMER, Chandigarh.
8. Since the allegations in the FIR are that of misusing armed
weapons and firing in the air, though there is no fire arm injury, the
petitioners as well as respondents shall surrender their weapons with the
authority and the authorities shall reassess the continuance of the arms
licence granted to them, if any.
(ALOK JAIN)
JUDGE
14.03.2024
manju
Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes/No
Whether Reportable:- Yes/No
