Punjab-Haryana High Court
Iqbal Singh And Others vs State Of Punjab And Others on 6 March, 2012
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
Crl. M. No.M-1537 of 2011
Date of Decision:6.3.2012
Iqbal Singh and others .... Petitioners
Versus
State of Punjab and others .... Respondents
And
Crl. M. No.M-35422 of 2010
Date of Decision:6.3.2012
Sarbjeet Singh and others
.... Petitioners
Versus
State of Punjab and others
.... Respondents
CORAM: Hon'ble Ms. Justice Nirmaljit Kaur
Present: Mr. Narender Sharma, Advocate.
Mr. Kirat Singh Sidhu, D.A.G. Punjab.
Mr. C.L. Sharma, Advocate.
****
1.Whether Reporters of Local Newspapers 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?
NIRMALJIT KAUR, J.(Oral)
The instant petitions have been filed for quashing of FIR No.71 dated 26.4.2009 registered under Sections 323/324/325/506/148/149 IPC at Police Station Model Town, Hoshiarpur as well as counter case under Sections 323/324/325/506/148/149 IPC registered at Police Station Model Town, Hoshiarpur and subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise entered into between the parties.
The brief facts of this case are that there was some hot exchange of words between the parties and a clash took place for Crl. M. No.M-1537 of 2011 -2- which both the parties sustained injuries and FIR in question as well as cross case was registered.
However, the matter has since been compromised due to the intervention of the respectable of the area. Compromise deed (Annexure P-1) has been placed on record in both the petitions in this regard.
Vide separate orders dated 20.1.2011 and 25.1.2011 passed in both the petitions, the parties were directed to be present before the trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate on 7.2.2011 and the trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate was directed to record the statements of both the parties to its satisfaction to know its genuineness and the trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate was also directed to send its report in this regard.
In pursuance to the same, reports of Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Hoshiarpur have been received in both the petitions. It is submitted in the reports that the statements of the parties were recorded by the court and from the perusal of the statements, it was concluded that the statements of the parties was voluntary and free from any pressure. It is further submitted that the matter has been compromised between the parties. From the affidavits filed by both the parties, it is made out that except the present FIR, no other FIR is pending between the parties. It is pertinent to mention that Kuldip Singh had not come present in the court and it is stated by Iqbal Singh, Balwinder Singh, Kulwant Singh and Gurmit Singh in their affidavits that Kuldip Singh brother of Sarabjit Singh is out of country.
Learned counsel for the parties also submitted that Kuldip Crl. M. No.M-1537 of 2011 -3- Singh, who had not appeared before the trial Court, is out of country. However, he is party to the compromise deed (Annexure P-1). Moreover, it is a case of version and cross version and in pursuance to the compromise, the FIR registered against him is also sought to be quashed.
Thus there is no doubt that the matter has been compromised between both the parties.
The Full Bench of this Court, in the case of Kulwinder Singh and others v. State of Punjab and another 2007(3) RCR (Criminal) 1052 has held that 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 not only in matrimonial discord but others as well, such compromise deserves to be accepted. It is further held as under:-
" 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 non-compoundable offences notwithstanding the bar under Section 320 of the Cr.P.C in order to prevent the abuse of Crl. M. No.M-1537 of 2011 -4- law and to secure the ends of justice."
In the case of Madan Mohan Abbot v. State of Punjab 2008(4) S.C. Cases 582, the Apex Court emphasised and advised as under:-
" We need to emphasise that it is perhaps advisable that in disputes where the question involved is of a purely personal nature, the court should ordinarily accept the terms of the compromise even in criminal proceedings as keeping the matter alive with no possibility of a result in favour of the prosecution is a luxury which the courts, grossly overburdened as they are, cannot afford and that the time so saved can be utilised in deciding more effective and meaningful litigation. This is a common sense approach to the matter based on ground of realities and bereft of the technicalities of the law."
In view of the settled position of law and in the facts of the present case, it is a fit case where there is no impediment in the way of the Court to accept the compromise and exercise its inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of FIR in the interest of justice to promote peace and harmony. The compromise is entered into without any pressure. The parties are co-villagers.
Accordingly, the instant petitions are allowed and FIR No.71 dated 26.4.2009 registered under Sections 323/324/325/506/148/149 IPC at Police Station Model Town, Crl. M. No.M-1537 of 2011 -5- Hoshiarpur as well as counter case under Sections 323/324/325/506/148/149 IPC registered at Police Station Model Town, Hoshiarpur and subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise entered into between the parties are hereby quashed in the interest of justice.
A photo copy of this order be placed on the connected case.
6.3.2012 ( NIRMALJIT KAUR ) rajeev JUDGE