Sarabjit Singh vs State Of Punjab And Another
2025 Latest Caselaw 2969 P&H

Citation : 2025 Latest Caselaw 2969 P&H
Judgement Date : 5 March, 2025

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Sarabjit Singh vs State Of Punjab And Another on 5 March, 2025

Author: Sandeep Moudgil

Bench: Sandeep Moudgil

           CRM-M-62857-2024                             1



                               IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                                            AT CHANDIGARH

                                                              CRM-M-62857-2024
           309                                                Date of decision: 05.03.2025


           Sarabjit Singh
                                                                                    ......Petitioner
                                                        Versus

           State of Punjab and Anr

                                                                  .....Respondents
           CORAM:              HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MOUDGIL

           Present:            Mr. G.C. Shahpuri, Advocate for the petitioner.

                               Mr. Rajiv Verma, DAG, Punjab.

                               Mr. Sandeep Sharma, Advocate for respondent No.2.

           SANDEEP MOUDGIL, J (ORAL)

This is a petition under Section 528 of BNSS for quashing of FIR

No.0311 dated 17.11.2023 under Section 420 IPC registered at P.S Civil Lines

Batala, District Batala with all the consequential proceedings arising therefrom, on

the basis of compromise (Annexure P-2).

During the pendency of the dispute, the parties have compromised the

matter and filed the present petition for quashing of FIR.

Vide order dated 03.02.2025, parties were directed to appear before

the Illaqa Magistrate/Trial Court and report with regard to the genuineness of the

compromise was called for.

The report dated 15.02.2025 has been received from Judicial

Magistrate, Ist Class, Batala, stating that the parties have entered into a

compromise, which is genuine, voluntary and without any coercion or undue

influence.

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."

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.0311 dated 17.11.2023 under Section 420