Punjab-Haryana High Court
Gursewak Singh Ghuman And Ors vs State Of Punjab And Or on 24 January, 2025
Author: Sandeep Moudgil
Bench: Sandeep Moudgil
Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:010847
251
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-63954-2024
DECIDED ON: 24.01.2025
GURSEWAK SINGH GHUMAN AND ORS
.....PETITIONER
VERSUS
STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS
.....RESPONDENTS
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MOUDGIL
Present: Mr. Manoj R. Sharma, Advocate
for the petitioner.
Mr. Jasjit Singh Rattu, DAG Punjab.
Mr. Sandeep Sharma, Advocate
for respondents No.2 & 3.
SANDEEP MOUDGIL, J (ORAL)
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that Section 316(2) of
BNS was not mentioned in the prayer clause due to oversight, though it is a
part of compromise deed dated 14.12.2024 (Annexure P-2). Therefore, he
prays for addition of offence under Section 316(2) of BNS in the prayer
clause.
Prayer is accepted.
Section 316(2) of BNS is added in the prayer clause of the
petition.
1. This is a petition under Section 528 BNSS, 2023, for quashing of
FIR No.150, dated 08.11.2024, under Sections 85, 117(2), 61(2) and 316(2) of
BNS, 2023 registered at Police Station Dera Baba Nanak, Police District
1 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:010847
Batala, District Gurdaspur, with all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom,
on the basis of compromise dated 14.12.2024 (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 18.12.2024, parties were directed to appear
before the Illaqa Magistrate/Trial Court and report with regard to the
genuineness of the compromise was called for.
4. The report dated 15.01.2025 has been received from Additional
Civil Judge (Senior Division) cum Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, 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
2 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:010847
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
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.150, dated 08.11.2024, under Sections
85, 117(2), 61(2) and 316(2) of BNS, 2023 registered at Police Station Dera
Baba Nanak, Police District Batala, District Gurdaspur, with all subsequent
proceedings arising therefrom, is hereby quashed qua the petitioners, on the
basis of compromise dated 14.12.2024 (Annexure P-2) .
9. The present petition is hereby allowed.
(SANDEEP MOUDGIL)
24.01.2025 JUDGE
Meenu
Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No
Whether reportable Yes/No
3 of 3
