Punjab-Haryana High Court
Rupinder Singh Alias Happy vs State Of Haryana And Another on 25 April, 2014
Author: Inderjit Singh
Bench: Inderjit Singh
In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh
......
Criminal Misc. No.M-33896 of 2013
.....
Date of decision:25.4.2014
Rupinder Singh alias Happy
.....Petitioner
v.
State of Haryana and another
.....Respondents
....
Present: Mr. G.S. Saini, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Shekhar Mudgal, Assistant Advocate General, Haryana
for the respondent-State.
Mr. B.S. Sidhu, Advocate for complainant-respondent No.2.
.....
Inderjit Singh, J.
This petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. praying for quashing of FIR No.268 dated 6.9.2012 (Annexure-P.1) registered for the offences under Sections 420 and 406 IPC (Sections 467, 468 and 471 IPC, which were added later on) at Police Station Naraingarh, District Ambala and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom in view of the compromise (Annexure-P.2).
The FIR has been registered on the statement of complainant- Hardev Singh alleging that the petitioner has cheated him for `1,20,000/- on the pretext of getting job for his son in the Railway. It has been stated in the petition that due to some misunderstanding and with regard to the economic transactions, dispute arose between the parties. Now with the Parmar Harpal Singh 2014.04.28 17:03 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh Cr. Misc. No.M-33896 of 2013 [2] intervention of the respectable members of the society and well wishers of both the parties, the disputes and differences between them have been resolved amicably and a compromise has been executed amongst them. It is stated that neither of the parties has any grouse or grievance against each other and all of them want to live at peace with each other and, therefore, they have decided to bring end to all litigation pending between them.
On notice, reply by way of affidavit of Shri Mukesh Kumar, HPS, Assistant Commissioner of Police, Naraingarh, has been filed on behalf of respondent No.1, in which it has been stated that the petitioner and his wife have committed white collared heinous crime of cheating, forgery and fraud to the tune of `1,20,000/-, on the pretext of getting job in Railway to the son of the complainant. During the independent and impartial investigation conducted by the local police, the petitioner was also found to be involved in commission of offences under Sections 467, 468, 471 along with Sections 406 and 420 IPC and challan against him has been presented before the Illaqa Magistrate for trial, which is now fixed on 26.4.2014. It has been further stated that the alleged compromise (Annexure-P.2) has never been brought to the knowledge of the local Police by the complainant, hence the FIR is not liable to be quashed.
Keeping in view the fact that the parties have entered into a compromise, they were directed to appear before learned trial Court for getting their statements recorded in support of the compromise. After doing the needful, learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Naraingarh has Parmar Harpal Singh 2014.04.28 17:03 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh Cr. Misc. No.M-33896 of 2013 [3] sent her report dated 26.11.2013 submitting that the compromise arrived at between the parties is without any pressure or coercion from any one and the same is genuine one. Complainant Hardev Singh has stated that the compromise has been effected between him and the accused Rupinder Singh. Nothing is due from the accused and he bears no grudge against him. Compromise effected is without any pressure on him and is out of his volition, hence, he has no objection if the criminal proceedings against the accused-petitioner are quashed.
Learned counsel for complainant-respondent No.2 admits the factum of compromise and submits that the complainant-respondent No.2 has no objection to the quashing of the FIR in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court.
I have gone through the record and have heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Assistant Advocate General, Haryana and learned counsel for complainant-respondent No.2.
In a decision, based on compromise, none of the parties is a loser. Rather, compromise not only brings peace and harmony between the parties to a dispute, but also restores tranquility in the society. After considering the nature of offences allegedly committed and the fact that both the parties have amicably settled their dispute, continuance of criminal prosecution would be an exercise in futility, as the chances of ultimate conviction are bleak.
The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and another, 2012 (4) RCR (Cr.) 543, has held that the inherent Parmar Harpal Singh 2014.04.28 17:03 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh Cr. Misc. No.M-33896 of 2013 [4] jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. can be exercised to quash the proceedings in respect of criminal cases arising from commercial, financial, mercantile, civil, partnership or such like transactions or the offences arising out of matrimony relating to dowry etc. or the family disputes where the wrong is basically private or personnel in nature and the parties have resolved their entire dispute even though they are not compoundable. Therefore, keeping in view the fact that the matter has been amicably settled and the law laid down in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and another (supra), this petition is allowed and FIR No.268 dated 6.9.2012 (Annexure-P.1) registered for the offences under Sections 420, 406 IPC and (Sections 467, 468 and 471 IPC which were added later on) at Police Station Naraingarh, District Ambala and all subsequent proceedings arising out of the same are hereby quashed. April 25, 2014. (Inderjit Singh) Judge *hsp* Parmar Harpal Singh 2014.04.28 17:03 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh