Punjab-Haryana High Court
Raj Kumar @ Gaala And Anr vs State Of Punjab And Anr on 13 May, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
241
CRM-M-2674-2019
Date of decision: 13.05.2022
RAJ KUMAR @ GAALA AND ANOTHER
.......Petitioners
VERSUS
STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER ....Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD S. BHARDWAJ
Present: Mr.Pranav Handa, Advocate
for the petitioners.
Mr. Karanbir Singh, AAG, Punjab.
Mr.Pranav Handa-II, Advocate
for respondent No.2.
*****
VINOD S. BHARDWAJ. J.(Oral)
1. By means of the instant petition, the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as "Cr.P.C) has been invoked for seeking quashing of FIR No. 73 (P-1) (version Case), dated 08.04.2015 registered under Sections 323, 324 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as "IPC") (Section 326 of the IPC was added later on) at Police Station Division Bhargo Camp, Jalandhar City, District Jalandhar and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise dated 10.08.2016 (Annexure P-2) entered between the parties.
2. The parties were directed to appear before the learned trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate vide order dated 21.01.2019 of this Court, to get 1 of 8 ::: Downloaded on - 25-07-2022 07:16:41 ::: CRM-M-2674-2019 -2- their statements recorded regarding the compromise arrived at between the parties and a report in this regard was called for.
3. A report by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Jalandhar was received vide memo No. 199 dated 14.06.2019. A perusal of the report shows that compromise has been effect voluntarily between the parties and is genuine and without coercion or any undue pressure.
4. Learned State counsel does not dispute the factum of the compromise amongst the parties and does not have any serious objection to the resolution of the dispute amongst the parties.
5. Mr. Pranav Handa-II, Advocate appears on behalf of respondent No. 2 and reiterates the settlement and his concurrence to the FIR and all the other consequential proceeding being quashed.
6. The Full Bench of this Court in the matter of "Kulwinder Singh and others versus State of Punjab and another" reported as (Punjab and Haryana High Court) : 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052 has observed as under:
'(28) To conclude, it can safely be said that there can never be any hard and fast category which can be prescribed to enable the Court to exercise its power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. The only principle that can be laid down is the one which has been incorporated in the Section itself, i.e., "to prevent abuse of the process of any Court" or "to secure the ends of justice".
(29) In Mrs. Shakuntala Sawhney v. Mrs. Kaushalya Sawhney and Ors., Hon'ble Krishna Iyer, J. aptly summoned up the essence of compromise in the following words:
2 of 8 ::: Downloaded on - 25-07-2022 07:16:42 ::: CRM-M-2674-2019 -3- "The finest hour of justice arrives propitiously when parties, despite falling apart, bury the hatchet and weave a sense of fellowship of reunion."
(30) The power to do complete justice is the very essence of every judicial justice dispensation system. It cannot be diluted by distorted perceptions and is not a slave to anything, except to the caution and circumspection, the standards of which the Court sets before it, in exercise of such plenary and unfettered power inherently vested in it while donning the cloak of compassion to achieve the ends of justice.
(31) No embargo, be in the shape of Section 320(9) of the Cr.P.C., or any other such curtailment, can whittle down the power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C.
(32) 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 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 absence of any premonitions to forecast and predict eventualities which the cause of justice may throw up during the course of a litigation.
(33) 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 3 of 8 ::: Downloaded on - 25-07-2022 07:16:42 ::: CRM-M-2674-2019 -4- 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.
(34) 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.
7. The legal principles as laid down for quashing of the judgment were also approved by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of 'Gian Singh Versus State of Punjab and another,(2012)10 SCC303'. Still further, the broad principles for exercising the powers under Section 482 were summarized by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of 'Parbatbhai Aahir @ Parbatbhai Bhimsinhbhai Karmur and others versus State of Gujarat and another" (2017) 9 SCC 641'.
4 of 8 ::: Downloaded on - 25-07-2022 07:16:42 ::: CRM-M-2674-2019 -5-
8. It is evident that in view of the amicable resolution of the issues amongst the parties, no useful purpose would be served by continuation of the proceedings. The furtherance of the proceedings is likely to be a waste of judicial time and there appears to be no chances of conviction.
9. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has held in the matter of 'Ramgopal And Another Vs State of Madhya Pradesh, 2021 SCC Online SC 834', that the matters which can be categorized as personal in nature or in the matter in which the nature of injuries do not exhibit mental depravity or commission of an offence of such a serious nature that quashing of which would override public interest, the Court can quash the FIR in view of the settlement arrived at amongst the parties. The observation of the Hon'ble Supreme Court is extracted as under:-
19. We thus sum-up and hold that as opposed to Section 320 Cr.P.C. where the Court is squarely guided by the compromise between the parties in respect of offences 'compoundable' within the statutory framework, the extra- ordinary power enjoined upon a High Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. or vested in this Court under Article 142 of the Constitution, can be invoked beyond the metes and bounds of Section 320 Cr.P.C. Nonetheless, we reiterate that such powers of wide amplitude ought to be exercised carefully in the context of quashing criminal proceedings, bearing in mind: (i) Nature and effect of the offence on the conscious of the society; (ii) Seriousness of the injury, if any; (iii) Voluntary nature of compromise between the accused and the victim; & (iv) Conduct of the accused persons, prior to and after the occurrence of the purported offence and/or other relevant considerations.
5 of 8 ::: Downloaded on - 25-07-2022 07:16:42 ::: CRM-M-2674-2019 -6-
10. The following relevant factors emerge from perusal of the case as well as the subsequent developments supplementing a case for invocation of the powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C.:-
i) The dispute in the present case is regarding an altercation which arises from previous enmity between the parties.
ii) The altercation resulted in the parties giving beatings causing injuries on non-vital parts of the body of the injured.
iii) The FIR in question was registered in the year 2015 and charges have been framed in the case and only 1 witness has been examined.
iv) Petitioner No.1 is around 25 years of age and continued incarceration of the petitioner is likely to cause severe impact on his social reputation and career prospects as well as in the discharge of his social duties.
v) The petitioner No.2 is 52 years of age and continuation of criminal proceedings is likely to cause serious impediment to the petitioner in discharge of his social obligations as well as obligations at his work place.
vi) The offence in question cannot be said to be heinous or as an offence that would be shocking to the conscience of the society or public at large. It can also not be termed as one shocking to the conscience of the Court;
vii) Continuation of the proceedings and forcing the parties to undergo rigours of criminal proceedings is not likely to sub-
serve any large public interest;
6 of 8 ::: Downloaded on - 25-07-2022 07:16:42 ::: CRM-M-2674-2019 -7-
viii) The proceedings are likely to end in futility for want of parties to support the case of the prosecution;
ix) No larger public purpose would be served by continuation of the proceedings;
x) Parties do not suffer any criminal antecedents and have not indulged in any such or similar case during the pendency of the case or after registration of the FIR.
xi) The complainant is not likely to support the case of the prosecution. Continuation of the proceedings is likely to be a waste of judicial time. The object of law is well served when the parties resolve their differences and choose to peacefully co-exist and live in harmony.
11. In view of the report of the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Jalandhar and the principles laid down by the Apex Court in Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab and others (2012) 10 SCC 303, as well as Ramgopal And Another Vs State of Madhya Pradesh 2021 SCC Online SC 834 and also by the Full Bench of this Court in Kulwinder Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab and another, 2007(3) RCR (Criminal) 1052, the instant petition is allowed. The aforesaid of FIR No. 73 (P-1) (version Case), dated 08.04.2015 registered under Sections 323, 324 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as "IPC") (Section 326 of the IPC was added later on) at Police Station Division Bhargo Camp, Jalandhar City, District Jalandhar and all other consequential proceedings arising therefrom are hereby quashed, qua the petitioners in view of compromise dated 10.08.2016 (Annexure P-2). However, the same would be subject to payment of cost of Rs.10,000/-
7 of 8 ::: Downloaded on - 25-07-2022 07:16:42 ::: CRM-M-2674-2019 -8- to be deposited by the each petitioner with the "Punjab and Haryana High Court Lawyers Welfare Fund", Chandigarh within one month from receipt of certified copy of this order.
Petition is allowed.
(VINOD S. BHARDWAJ)
MAY 13, 2022 JUDGE
Vishal Sharma
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No
Whether Reportable : Yes/No
8 of 8
::: Downloaded on - 25-07-2022 07:16:42 :::