Jitender Singh Chaudhary And Others vs State Of Haryana And Another
2024 Latest Caselaw 19598 P&H

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Jitender Singh Chaudhary And Others vs State Of Haryana And Another on 6 November, 2024

Author: Sandeep Moudgil

Bench: Sandeep Moudgil

CRM-M-49039-2024                1




IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                 AT CHANDIGARH
                                  CRM-M-49039-2024
270                               Date of decision: 06.11.2024



Jitender Singh Chaudhary and Ors.                              ......Petitioners
                                      Versus
State of Haryana & Anr
                                                                  .....Respondents
CORAM:       HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MOUDGIL

Present:     Mr. Mohit Chaudhary, Advocate for the petitioners.
             Mr. Chetan Sharma, DAG, Haryana.
             Mr. Sandeep Sharma, Advocate for respondent No.2.


SANDEEP MOUDGIL, J (ORAL)

This is a petition under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023 for quashing of

FIR No.150 dated 30.04.2024 under Sections 406,420 IPC registered at P.S

Karnal Civil Lines, District Karnal with all the consequential proceedings arising

therefrom, on the basis of compromise dated 23.09.2024 (Annexure P-2).

During the pendency of the dispute, the parties have compromised the

matter and filed the present petition for quashing of FIR.

Vide order dated 30.09.2024, 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 21.10.2024 has been received from Judicial

Magistrate, Ist Class, Karnal 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.150 dated 30.04.2024 under Sections

406,420 IPC registered at P.S Karnal Civil Lines, District Karnal with all the

consequential proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise dated

23.09.2024 (Annexure P-2), with all the consequential proceedings arising

therefrom, is quashed qua the petitioners, on the basis of compromise.

The present petition is hereby allowed.

( SANDEEP MOUDGIL ) JUDGE 06.11.2024 manoj

1. Whether speaking/ reasoned : Yes /No

2. Whether reportable : Yes /No