Punjab-Haryana High Court
Bittu vs State Of Punjab And Another on 8 November, 2024
Author: Sandeep Moudgil
Bench: Sandeep Moudgil
CRM-M-8166-2024 (O&M) -1- 2084: PHHE 14598
110+232
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-8166-2024 (O&M)
DECIDED ON: 08.11.2024
BITTU PETITIONER
VERSUS
STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER
seeee RESPONDENTS
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MOUDGIL
Present: Mr. Naveen Sharma (Moudgil), Advocate for
Mr. Surinder Sharma, Advocate
for the petitioner.
Mr. Durgesh Garg, AAG, Punjab.
Mr. Manjot Singh, Advocate for
Mr. Lovish Rattan, Advocate
for respondent No.2.
None for the applicant/intervener.
SANDEEP MOUDGIL, J (QRAL)
CRM-22768-2024
This is an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for permission to
place on record reply to the application for impleading intervener as
respondent No.3 in the memo of parties.
For the reasons mentioned in the application, the same is allowed
subject to all just exceptions. Reply is taken on record.
The application stands disposed of.
CRM-15716-2024
1. This is an application for impleading the Intervener as respondent
No.3 in the memo of parties.
CRM-M-8166-2024 (O&M) 2. 2084: PHHE 14598
2. Vide order dated 10.04.2024, notice in the application was issued.
3. Mr. Naveen Sharma (Moudgil) Advocate and Mr. Manjot Singh,
Advocate have put in appearance on behalf of the petitioner and respondent
No.2 respectively, who submit that the applicant/intervener is only the
informer and not the aggrieved party.
4. Therefore, this Court is of the considered opinion that the
applicant/intervener being an informer has no right to intervene in between
when the main parties i.e. the petitioner and respondent No.2 have no
objection if the FIR in question is quashed.
5. Hence, in view of the reply filed via CRM-22768-2024 and
submissions made by learned counsel the petitioner and respondent No.2, the
present application is devoid of merits, stands dismissed.
CRM-M-8166-2024
1. This is a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of FIR
No.183, dated 21.12.2023 (Annexure P-1), under Sections 420, 465, 468, 469,
471 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, registered at Police Station Goraya,
District Jalandhar Rural, with all the consequential proceedings arising
therefrom, on the basis of compromise dated 07.02.2024 (Annexure P-2).
2. During the pendency of the dispute, the parties have
compromised the matter and filed the present petition for quashing of FIR.
3. Vide order dated 15.02.2024, parties were directed to appear
before the Illaga Magistrate/Trial Court and report with regard to the
genuineness of the compromise was called for.
4. The report dated 29.02.2024 has been received from Judicial
Magistrate Ist Class, Phillaur, stating that the parties have entered into a
compromise, which is genuine, voluntary and without any coercion or undue
CRM-M-8166-2024 (O&M) 3. 2ReeHne-r4so0}
influence.
5. 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."
6. 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
CRM-M-8166-2024 (O&M) 4 2084: PHHE 14598
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".
7. 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.
8. In view of above, FIR No.183, dated 21.12.2023 (Annexure P-1),
under Sections 420, 465, 468, 469, 471 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860,
registered at Police Station Goraya, District Jalandhar Rural, with all the
consequential proceedings arising therefrom, is quashed qua the petitioner, on
the basis of compromise dated 07.02.2024 (Annexure P-2).
9. The present petition is hereby allowed.
(SANDEEP MOUDGIL)
08.11.2024 JUDGE
Poonam Negi
Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No
Whether reportable Yes/No
