Punjab-Haryana High Court
Ramandeep Singh Cheema vs The State Of Punjab & Anr on 21 October, 2008
Author: Ajai Lamba
Bench: Ajai Lamba
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH.
Criminal Misc.20672-M of 2008
DATE OF DECISION : OCTOBER 21, 2008
RAMANDEEP SINGH CHEEMA ....... PETITIONER(S)
VERSUS
THE STATE OF PUNJAB & ANR. .... RESPONDENT(S)
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA
PRESENT: Mr.MS Balianwali, Advocate, for the petitioner(s).
Mr. Sidarath Sarup, AAG, Haryana.
Mr. PS Hundal, Advocate, for respondent No.2.
AJAI LAMBA, J. (Oral)
This petition under Section 482, Code of Criminal Procedure, seeks quashing of FIR No.148 dated 5.4.2007 under Sections 420, 498-A, 406, 34, Indian Penal Code, Police Station, Civil Lines, Karnal (Annexure P-1), on the basis of compromise.
The petition has been filed at the instance of Ramandeep Singh Cheema, brother of Ravdeepak Singh. Ravdeepak Singh was married to respondent No.2/complainant; namely, Navdeep Sandhu, on 18.3.2006. The alliance did not survive and on account of this, the FIR came to be lodged.
Now, with the initiative having been taken by common friends and relatives, all the disputes have been settled by way of compromise (Annexure P-2).
Criminal Misc.20672-M of 2008 2
Navdeep Sandhu, as identified by her counsel Shri P.S. Hundal, is present in court, and states that indeed all the disputes have been settled. Respondent No.2 had received Rs.5 lacs in cash on 25.5.2008 in full and final settlement of all her claims. Respondent No.2 has given a statement that she does not want to prosecute the petitioner and wants to settle down in her life. Continuance of proceedings would disturb the future life of respondent No.2 as well.
Learned counsel for the respondent-State has no objection to the quashing of the FIR, on the basis of compromise.
This Court in a full Bench (5 Judges) has considered the issue of quashing of proceedings in view of compromise in Kulwinder Singh vs. State of Punjab, 2007(3) RCR(Criminal) 1052 (Full Bench). The following has been held in paras 28 to 30:-
"28. 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 so- cial 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 ab- sence of any premonitions to forecast and predict eventuali- ties which the cause of justice may throw up during the course of a litigation.Criminal Misc.20672-M of 2008 3
29. The only inevitable conclusion from the above discussion is that there is no statutory bar under the Cr.P.C which can af- fect the inherent power of this Court under Section 482. Fur- ther, 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.
30. 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."
Having regard to the nature of controversy, the dispute having arisen on account of matrimonial discord; all the disputes having been settled by way of compromise (Annexure P-2); statement given by respondent No.2 that she has received the money in full and final settlement of all her claims, continuance of proceedings shall not be in the Criminal Misc.20672-M of 2008 4 interest of peace and harmony.
In view of the above, the petition is allowed. FIR No.148 dated 5.4.2007 under Sections 420, 498-A, 406, 34, Indian Penal Code, Police Station, Civil Lines, Karnal (Annexure P-1) is quashed.
October 21, 2008 ( AJAI LAMBA ) Kang JUDGE