Punjab-Haryana High Court
Gurbakshish Singh vs State Of Punjab And Others on 21 November, 2024
Author: Sandeep Moudgil
Bench: Sandeep Moudgil
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:153597
281
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-51606-2024
DATE OF DECISION: 21.11.2024
GURBAKSHISH SINGH ...PETITIONER
Versus
STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS ... RESPONDENTS
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MOUDGIL
Present: Mr. Gulzar Mohammed, Advocate for the petitioner(s).
Mr. Rajiv Verma, DAG, Punjab.
Mr. V.S. Rana, Advocate for
Mr. Rajesh Gupta, Advocate
for respondents No. 2 and 3.
***
SANDEEP MOUDGIL, J (ORAL)
This is a petition under Section 531 of BNSS, 2023 for
quashing of FIR No.341, dated 03.12.2010 (Annexure P-1), under
Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC, registered at Police Station Maloud
and supplementary police report dated 03.03.2023 presented on
12.04.2023 and registered as CHI No.51 of 2023 (Annexure P-3) in
FIR No.341 dated 03.12.2010, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC,
registered at Police Station Payal with all subsequent proceedings
arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise dated 26.09.2024
(Annexure P-6).
During the pendency of the dispute, the parties have
compromised the matter and filed the present petition for quashing of
FIR.
Vide order dated 21.10.2024, 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:153597
The report dated 30.10.2024 has been received from
Judicial Magistrate First Class, Payal, stating that the parties have
entered into a compromise, which is genuine, voluntary and without
any coercion or undue influence.
Learned counsel for respondents No.2 and 3 submits that
he has no objection if the petition is allowed.
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:153597
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.341, dated 03.12.2010
(Annexure P-1), under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC, registered at
Police Station Maloud and supplementary police report dated
03.03.2023 presented on 12.04.2023 and registered as CHI No.51 of
2023 (Annexure P-3) in FIR No.341 dated 03.12.2010, under Sections
420, 467, 468, 471 IPC, registered at Police Station Payal with all
subsequent proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise
dated 26.09.2024 (Annexure P-6), is quashed qua the petitioner.
The present petition is hereby allowed.
(SANDEEP MOUDGIL)
JUDGE
21.11.2024
anuradha
Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No
Whether reportable Yes/No
3 of 3
