Punjab-Haryana High Court

Avtar Chand And Others vs State Of Punjab And Others on 7 January, 2025

                                 Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:001326




          IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                        AT CHANDIGARH
249
                                                             CRM-M-59873-2024
                                                             Decided on : 07.01.2025

Avtar Chand and others
                                                                      . . . Petitioner(s)
                                         Versus
State of Punjab and others
                                                                    . . . Respondent(s)

CORAM:       HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH

PRESENT: Mr. R.D. Rattewal, Advocate
         for the petitioner(s).

             Mr. Rubal Pawar, AAG, Punjab

             Mr. Deepak Chaudhary, Advocate
             for respondents No.2 & 3.

                                         ****

SANJAY VASHISTH, J. (Oral)

1. The present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C., has been filed

by the petitioners, for quashing of FIR No. 82, dated 15.08.2023 (Annexure

P-1), for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 452, 427, 34 of IPC,

and Sections 120-B & 201 of IPC (added later on vide DDR No.16, dated

25.09.2024), registered at Police Station Bilga, District Jalandhar, and all the

consequential proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of

compromise/affidavits dated 21.10.2024 (Annexures P-2 & P-3).

2. Vide order dated 29.11.2024, the affected parties were directed

to appear before the learned trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate, for getting their

respective statements recorded with regard to the compromise. The trial

Court/Illaqa Magistrate was to submit a report in this regard giving certain

details as enumerated in the said order.

3. Pursuant to the order dated 29.11.2024, passed by this Court,

1 of 7

Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:001326

the parties have appeared before learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class,

Phillaur, and as per report dated 24.12.2024, submitted to this Court, both the

parties have got recorded their respective statements in Court. The operative

part of the report received from learned Court below is as under:-

" After having considered the statements of the parties i.e. statements of accused persons namely, Avtar Chand, Jagtar, Gurwinder Singh and Anarjit, complainant Paramjit Kumar, victim/aggrieved Loveraj and Investigating Officer ASI Dalwara Singh no.258/Jalandhar (Rural), P.S. Bilga, District Jalandhar, the report in the prescribed format is as under:-

Name of the report Court. Mukesh Kumar Singla, Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Phillaur FIR Dated Police Station Sections No. 82 15.08.2023 Bilga, District 323, 452, 427, 34 Jalandhar, Rural IPC (120-B and 201 IPC added later on vide DDR no.16 dated 25.09.2024)

1. Names of the Paramjit Kumar (Complainant) complainant/victims(s)/ Loveraj (Injured/victim) aggrieved person(s)

2. Dates on which the 16.12.2024 statement(s) of the complainant/victim(s)/a ggrieved persons(s) recorded.

3. Has the identity of the Yes complainant/victim(s)/a ggrieved person(s) been verified?

4. Whether all the Yes victims/all the aggrieved persons have compromised the matter?

5. Is there pressure, threat, No or coercion upon the victim(s)/aggrieved person(s)/complainant?

6. Names of the accused 1. Avtar Chand person(s). 2. Jagtar

3. Gurwinder Singh

4. Anarjit

7. Dates on which the 16.12.2024 statement(s) of the accused person(s)

2 of 7

Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:001326

recorded.

8. Whether all the accused Yes have compromised the matter? If no, then the names of the accused who have compromised

9. Whether proclamation No proceedings are pending against any accused?

10. Has the police report No has been filed or not?

11. Notice of No accusation/charges have been framed or not?

12. Sections of statutes 323, 452, 427, 34 IPC (120-B and 201 invoked in the matter IPC added later on vide DDR no.16 dated 25.09.2024)

13. Whether the court is Yes satisfied with the genuineness of the compromise?

"

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners urged that due to intervention

of the respectable and elderly people of the society, the matter has been

resolved and private parties have effected a compromise/affidavits dated

21.10.2024 (Annexures P-2 & P-3). At present, there remains no dispute

amongst the private parties. He further submits that in view of the

compromise so effected between the private parties, pendency of the

impugned FIR and consequential proceedings emanating therefrom would be

sheer abuse of the process of law.

5. Learned State counsel as also learned counsel for respondents

No.2 & 3, after going through the statements and the report received from

learned Court below, very fairly admit that the private parties have resolved

their dispute and effected a compromise and that they have no objection if

the impugned FIR and all the consequential proceedings are quashed on the

basis of the compromise.

3 of 7

Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:001326

6. The Full Bench of this Court in the matter of Kulwinder Singh

and others v. State of Punjab and another, 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052,

has observed as under:

"(28) To conclude, it can safely be said that there can never be any hard and fast category which can be prescribed to enable the Court to exercise its power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. The only principle that can be laid down is the one which has been incorporated in the Section itself, i.e., "to prevent abuse of the process of any Court" or "to secure the ends of justice".

(29) In Mrs. Shakuntala Sawhney v. Mrs. Kaushalya Sawhney and others, Hon'ble Krishna Iyer, J. aptly summoned up the essence of compromise in the following words:

"The finest hour of justice arrives propitiously when parties, despite falling apart, bury the hatchet and weave a sense of fellowship of reunion."

(30) The power to do complete justice is the very essence of every judicial justice dispensation system. It cannot be diluted by distorted perceptions and is not a slave to anything, except to the caution and circumspection, the standards of which the Court sets before it, in exercise of such plenary and unfettered power inherently vested in it while donning the cloak of compassion to achieve the ends of justice.

(31) No embargo, be in the shape of Section 320(9) of the Cr.P.C., or any other such curtailment, can whittle down the power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C.

(32) The compromise, in a modern society, is the sine qua non of harmony and orderly behaviour. It is the soul of justice and if the power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. is used to enhance such a compromise which, in turn, enhances the social amity and reduces friction, then it truly is "finest hour of justice". Disputes which have their genesis in a matrimonial discord, landlord-tenant matters, commercial transactions and other such matters can safely be dealt with by the Court by exercising its powers under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. in the event of a compromise, but this is not to say that the power is limited to such cases. There can never be any such rigid rule to prescribe the exercise of such power, especially in the absence of any premonitions to forecast and predict eventualities which the cause of justice may throw up during the course of a litigation.

(33) The only inevitable conclusion from the above

4 of 7

Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:001326

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 non-compoundable 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.

(34) 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."

7. The legal principles as laid down for quashing of the criminal

proceedings were also approved by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Gian Singh

v. 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 Parbatbhai Aahir @ Parbatbhai Bhimsinhbhai

Karmur and others v. State of Gujarat and another, (2017) 9 SCC 641.

8. Further, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held in Ramgopal and

another v. State of Madhya Pradesh, 2021 SCC Online SC 834, that the

matters which can be categorized as personal in nature or in the matter in

which the nature of injuries do not exhibit mental depravity or commission of

an offence of such a serious nature that quashing of which would override

public interest, the Court can quash the FIR in view of the settlement arrived

5 of 7

Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:001326

at amongst the parties. The observation of the Hon'ble Supreme Court is

extracted as under:-

"19. We thus sum-up and hold that as opposed to Section 320 Cr.P.C. where the Court is squarely guided by the compromise between the parties in respect of offences 'compoundable' within the statutory framework, the extra- ordinary power enjoined upon a High Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. or vested in this Court under Article 142 of the Constitution, can be invoked beyond the metes and bounds of Section 320 Cr.P.C. Nonetheless, we reiterate that such powers of wide amplitude ought to be exercised carefully in the context of quashing criminal proceedings, bearing in mind: (i) Nature and effect of the offence on the conscious of the society; (ii) Seriousness of the injury, if any; (iii) Voluntary nature of compromise between the accused and the victim; & (iv) Conduct of the accused persons, prior to and after the occurrence of the purported offence and/or other relevant considerations."

9. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and going through

the material available on record, this Court finds that there appears to be

substance in the submission of learned counsel for the petitioners that

pendency of the present criminal litigation would be abuse of process of law

since the chances of conviction of the petitioners are bleak in view of the

compromise so effected between the private parties.

10. The report alongwith statements of the affected parties received

from learned Court below would reveal that the aggrieved person has

genuinely effected a compromise with the petitioners and he has no objection

if the impugned FIR and consequential proceedings are quashed.

11. Keeping in view totality of the facts and circumstances of the

case and taking into consideration the ratio of the judgments in the cases of