Punjab-Haryana High Court
Naresh Arora vs State Of Haryana And Others on 6 August, 2018
Author: Arvind Singh Sangwan
Bench: Arvind Singh Sangwan
CRM-M-40206-2017 -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-40206-2017
Date of Decision: August 06, 2018
Naresh Arora...................................................................................Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana and another.......................................................Respondents
CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND SINGH SANGWAN
Present: Mr.Rahul Bhargava, Advocate for the petitioner.
Ms.Harpreet Kaur, Assistant Advocate General, Haryana
Mr.Vaibhav Narang, Advocate for respondent Nos.2
*****
ARVIND SINGH SANGWAN, J.
Petitioner has filed the present petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for quashing of FIR No. 463 dated 17.6.2017 filed under Sections 406, 420 (Sections 467, 468, 471 IPC added later on) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (`IPC' for short), registered at Police Station Civil Lines, Karnal City, District Karnal (Annexure P1), alongwith all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise (Annexure P3) .
Vide order dated 11.12.2017, a direction was given to the Illaqa Magistrate to record the statements of the parties and submit a report regarding the genuineness of the compromise effected between the parties and also to intimate whether any accused is declared as proclaimed offender.
1 of 4 ::: Downloaded on - 12-08-2018 20:58:51 ::: CRM-M-40206-2017 -2- In pursuance thereof, the trial Court has submitted a report on 12.1.2018 (forwarded by the District and Sessions Judge Karnal on 12.1.2018), after recording the statements of the parties. The trial Court has submitted that the complainant-Om Parkash and accused- Naresh Arora have appeared along with their respective counsel, who had identified them and got their statements recorded acknowledging that the compromise had been effected voluntarily, without any coercion or any undue influence. The trial Court has further stated that none of the accused persons have been declared as proclaimed offender.
Perusal of allegations in the FIR reveals that the present case squarely falls in the category of cases that can be quashed by the High Court, in exercise of its inherent power under Section 482 of the Code. Keeping in view authoritative enunciation of law laid down by Hon'ble the Supreme Court of India in "Gian Singh vs State of Punjab and another", 2012(4) R.C.R. (Criminal) 543 and in the light of facts and circumstances of the present case, this Court is of the considered opinion that continuation of criminal proceedings would amount to abuse of process of law and it is expedient in the interest of justice that criminal proceedings are put to an end.
As per the Full Bench judgement of this Court in Kulwinder Singh and others vs. State of Punjab, 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052, 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 felt that the same was required to prevent the abuse of the process of any Court or to otherwise secure the ends of justice. This power of quashing 2 of 4 ::: Downloaded on - 12-08-2018 20:58:52 ::: CRM-M-40206-2017 -3- is not confined to matrimonial disputes alone.
The Apex Court in Central Bureau of Investigation vs. Sadhu Ram Singla and others (2017) 5 Supreme Court Cases 350 has held as under:-
"Having carefully considered the singular facts and circumstances of the present case, and also the law relating to the continuance of criminal cases where the complainant and the accused had settled their differences and had arrived at an amicable arrangement, we see no reason to differ with the view taken in Manoj Sharma's case (supra) and several decisions of this Court delivered thereafter with respect to the doctrine of judicial restraint. In concluding hereinabove, we are not unmindful of the view recorded in the decisions cited at the Bar that depending on the attendant facts, continuance of the criminal proceedings, after a compromise has been arrived at between the complainant and the accused, would amount to abuse of process of Court and an exercise in futility since the trial would be prolonged and ultimately, it may end in a decision which may be of no consequence to any of the parties."
Since the parties have arrived at a compromise and have decided to live in peace, no useful purpose would be served in allowing the criminal proceedings to continue.
Accordingly, this petition is allowed. FIR No. 463 dated 17.6.2017 filed under Sections 406, 420 (Sections 467, 468, 471 IPC added later on) IPC, registered at Police Station Civil Lines, Karnal City, District Karnal (Annexure P1), is ordered to be quashed subject to payment of 3 of 4 ::: Downloaded on - 12-08-2018 20:58:52 ::: CRM-M-40206-2017 -4- costs in the sum of ` 5000/- to be deposited in the Office of District Legal Services Authority, Karnal within 8 weeks from today, failing which this order shall stand recalled automatically without reference to the Court.
(ARVIND SINGH SANGWAN) JUDGE August 06, 2018 arya Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether Reportable:Yes/No 4 of 4 ::: Downloaded on - 12-08-2018 20:58:52 :::