Punjab-Haryana High Court
Shyam Sunder Verma And Another vs State Of Haryana And Another on 9 April, 2015
Author: Paramjeet Singh
Bench: Paramjeet Singh
IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT
CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-3575-2015
Date of Decision : 09.04.2015
Shyam Sunder Verma and another
.......... Petitioners
Versus
State of Haryana and another
...... Respondents
*****
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PARAMJEET SINGH
Present : Mr. Pankaj Maini, Advocate
for the petitioners.
Mr. Naveen Sheoran, DAG, Haryana.
****
1. Whether Reporters of Local papers may be allowed to see the
judgment?
2. To be referred to the Reporters or not?
3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?
PARAMJEET SINGH, J. (ORAL)
This petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, seeking quashing of case FIR No.535 dated 02.10.2005 registered under Sections 323, 325, 452, 506, 148, 149, 307, 379, 120-B and 34 of IPC and Section 25 of the Arms Act registered at Police Station Civil Lines, Rohtak, along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise between the parties.
Reply by State filed in Court today, is taken on record. Vide order dated 04.02.2015 parties were directed to appear before the trial Court to get their statements recorded with regard to compromise/settlement and trial Court was directed to send the report.
In pursuance of order dated 04.02.2015, learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, has submitted its report dated 09/11.03.2015, which indicates that parties appeared before him and got recorded their SATYAWAN 2015.04.10 16:25 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court Chandigarh CRM-M-3575-2015 -2- respective statements with regard to validity of compromise. As per the report, compromise arrived at between the parties is genuine and without any pressure or coercion from any corner. Learned counsel states that now no dispute survives between the parties.
Consequently, in view of the compromise and keeping in view the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Madan Mohan Abbot v. State of Punjab, 2008(2) RCR (Criminal) 429, Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and another, 2012(4) RCR (Criminal) 543, Narinder Singh and others v. State of Punjab and another, 2014(2) RCR (Criminal) 482 and Full Bench judgment of this Court in the case of Kulwinder Singh and others vs. State of Punjab and another, 2007(3) RCR (Crl.) 1052, no useful purpose would be served in prolonging the litigation, especially when this case does not fall within the category of exceptional cases where this Court should not exercise its inherent jurisdictional power to quash the criminal proceedings, as held in Gian Singh's case (supra). In the facts and circumstances of this case it would be unfair or contrary to the interest of justice to continue with the criminal proceedings or continuation of the criminal proceedings would amount to abuse of process of law despite settlement and compromise between the victim and wrongdoer and to secure the ends of justice, therefore, it is appropriate that criminal case is put to an end.
The present petition is allowed. FIR No.535 dated 02.10.2005 registered under Sections 323, 325, 452, 506, 148, 149, 307, 379, 120-B and 34 of IPC and Section 25 of the Arms Act registered at Police Station Civil Lines, Rohtak, along with all consequential proceedings arising out of it, on the basis of compromise, is quashed.
SATYAWAN2015.04.10 16:25 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court Chandigarh CRM-M-3575-2015 -3-
It is, however, made clear that if the proceedings already stand concluded and conviction recorded in the present case, this order shall be treated non est and, thus, will have no bearing on the conviction and sentence order.
(PARAMJEET SINGH) JUDGE 09.04.2015 'SP' SATYAWAN 2015.04.10 16:25 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court Chandigarh