Punjab-Haryana High Court
Bali Ram Hari And Ors vs State Of Haryana And Others on 20 July, 2022
Author: Vikas Bahl
Bench: Vikas Bahl
CRM-M-27571-2022 (O&M) -1-
284
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-27571-2022 (O&M)
Date of decision : 20.07.2022
Bali Ram Hari and others
...Petitioners
Versus
State of Haryana and others
...Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS BAHL
Present: Mr. Amit Khatkar, Advocate for the petitioners.
Mr. Anmol Malik, DAG, Haryana.
Mr. Sandeep Berwal, Advocate for respondent Nos.2 and 3.
****
VIKAS BAHL, J. (ORAL)
This is a petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of FIR No.83 dated 20.02.2017 registered under Sections 147, 149, 323, 452, 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 at Police Station Thanesar, District Kurukshetra (Annexure P-1) and all the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise.
On 29.06.2022, this Court had passed the following order:-
"This is a petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of FIR No.83 dated 20.02.2017 registered under Sections 147, 149, 323, 452, 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 at Police Station Thanesar, District Kurukshetra (Annexure P-1) and all the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise.
1 of 5
::: Downloaded on - 23-07-2022 03:13:36 :::
CRM-M-27571-2022 (O&M) -2-
Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that all the persons concerned are party to the compromise.
Notice of motion for 20.07.2022.
On asking of the Court, Mr. Pradeep Prakash Chahar, DAG, Haryana appears and accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State.
The parties are directed to appear before the Illaqa Magistrate/trial Court for recording their statements qua compromise within a period of two weeks.
The Illaqa Magistrate/trial Court is directed to submit a report on or before the next date of hearing containing the following information:-
1. Number of persons arrayed as accused.
2. Whether any accused is proclaimed offender?
3. Whether the compromise is genuine, voluntary and without any coercion or undue influence?
4. Whether the accused persons are involved in any other FIR or not?
5. The trial Court is also directed to record the statement of the Investigating Officer as to how many victims/complainants are there in the FIR. "
In pursuance of the abovesaid order, a report has been submitted by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kurukshetra. The relevant portion of the said report is reproduced hereinbelow:-
"Further the information sought by Hon'ble High Court in the above said order is given as under:-
1) Number of persons arrayed as accused in FIR.
There are five accused, who have been arrayed in FIR
2) Whether any accused is proclaimed offender No
3) Whether the compromise is genuine, voluntary and without any coercion or undue influence The said compromise/settlement is genuine and is not
2 of 5 ::: Downloaded on - 23-07-2022 03:13:36 ::: CRM-M-27571-2022 (O&M) -3- result of any pressure or coercion in any manner.
4) Whether the accused persons are involved in any other case or not? No
5) The trial Court is also directed to record the statement of the Investigating Officer as to how many victims/complainants are there in the FIR.
Statement of Investigating Officer was recorded, as per which, there is only one complainant/victim in the present case.
This is for your honours kind information please. Original statements of both the parties along with statement of Investigating Officer is enclosed herewith for kind perusal of the Hon'ble Punjab and Haryana High Court.
Yours faithfully, Sd/- (Jatin Garg), Addl.Chief Judicial Magistrate Kurukshetra 12.07.2022 (UID:HR0278)"
A perusal of the said report would show that the compromise has been found to be genuine, without any pressure or undue influence. It has been stated that the statements of the complainant as well as the accused have been recorded in the case and both have stated that the matter has been compromised and they have no objection in case the FIR is quashed. It is further stated that the statement of the complainant has been made voluntarily without any fear, coercion or pressure.
Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioners were not declared proclaimed offender in the present case and there are no other cases pending against the petitioners. Learned counsel for the State, as per instructions has stated that these facts are correct.
3 of 5 ::: Downloaded on - 23-07-2022 03:13:36 ::: CRM-M-27571-2022 (O&M) -4- Learned counsel for respondent Nos.2 and 3 has again reiterated that the matter has been settled and the said compromise is in the interest of all the persons and would help in bringing out peace and amity between the two parties.
This Court has heard the learned counsel for the parties and has perused the file. After perusing the report submitted by the trial Court, this Court finds that the matter has been amicably settled between the petitioners and the complainant. Since the matter has been settled and the parties have decided to live in peace, this Court feels that in order to secure the ends of justice, the criminal proceedings deserve to be quashed.
As per the Full Bench judgment of this Court in "Kulwinder Singh and others Vs State of Punjab", reported as 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052, it is held that High Court has power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to allow the compounding of non-compoundable offence and quash the prosecution where the High Court is of the opinion that the same is required to prevent the abuse of the process of law or otherwise to secure the ends of justice. This power of quashing is not confined to matrimonial disputes alone.
Hon'ble the Apex Court in the case of "Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab and another", reported as 2012 (4) RCR (Criminal) 543, had also observed that in order to secure the ends of justice or to prevent the abuse of process of Court, inherent power can be used by this Court to quash criminal proceedings in which a compromise has been effected. The relevant portion of para 57 of the said judgment is reproduced hereinbelow:-
"57. The position that emerges from the above discussion
4 of 5 ::: Downloaded on - 23-07-2022 03:13:36 ::: CRM-M-27571-2022 (O&M) -5- can be summarised thus: the power of the High Court in quashing a criminal proceeding or FIR or complaint in exercise of its inherent jurisdiction is distinct and different from the power given to a criminal court for compounding the offences under Section 320 of the Code. Inherent power is of wide plenitude with no statutory limitation but it has to be exercised in accord with the guideline engrafted in such power viz; (i) to secure the ends of justice or (ii) to prevent abuse of the process of any Court. XXX---XXX"
In view of what has been discussed hereinabove, the petition is allowed and FIR No.83 dated 20.02.2017 registered under Sections 147, 149, 323, 452, 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 at Police Station Thanesar, District Kurukshetra (Annexure P-1) and all the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise, are ordered to be quashed, qua the petitioners.
All the pending miscellaneous applications, if any, stand disposed of in view of the abovesaid judgment.
20.07.2022 (VIKAS BAHL)
Pawan JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes/No
Whether reportable:- Yes/No
5 of 5
::: Downloaded on - 23-07-2022 03:13:36 :::