Punjab-Haryana High Court
Avtar Singh And Others vs State Of Haryana And Another on 20 November, 2024
Author: Sandeep Moudgil
Bench: Sandeep Moudgil
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:152263
257
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-16020-2019 (O&M)
DECIDED ON: 20.11.2024
AVTAR SINGH AND OTHERS
.....PETITIONERS
VERSUS
STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER
.....RESPONDENTS
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MOUDGIL
Present: Mr. Arjunveer Sharma, Advocate
for the petitioners.
Mr. Surender Singh Pannu, Addl. AG, Haryana.
Mr. Kushagra Mahaja, Advocate for respondent No.2.
SANDEEP MOUDGIL, J (ORAL)
1. This is a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of FIR
No.16 dated 04.02.2019, under Sections 406, 420, 467, 468, 471 of IPC, registered
at Police Station Guhla, District Kaithal (Annexure P-1), with all subsequent
proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise dated 25.03.2019
(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 16.10.2024, parties were directed to appear before
the Illaqa Magistrate/Trial Court and report with regard to the genuineness of the
compromise was called for.
1 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:152263
4. The report dated 30.10.2024 has been received from Sub Divisional
Judicial Magistrate, Guhla, District Kaithal, stating that the parties have entered
into a compromise, which is genuine, voluntary and without any coercion or
undue 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."
2 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:152263
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 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.16 dated 04.02.2019, under Sections 406,
420, 467, 468, 471 of IPC, registered at Police Station Guhla, District Kaithal
(Annexure P-1), is quashed qua the petitioners, on the basis of compromise dated
25.03.2019 (Annexure P-2).
9. The present petition is hereby allowed.
10. Pending applications, if any be disposed off accordingly.
(SANDEEP MOUDGIL)
20.11.2024 JUDGE
Meenu
Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No
Whether reportable Yes/No
3 of 3
