Punjab-Haryana High Court
Atma Ram vs State Of Punjab And Another on 23 February, 2012
CRM M 39202 of 2011 -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
--
Date of decision: 23.02.2012
CRM M 39202 of 2011
Atma Ram ........ Petitioners
Versus
State of Punjab and another .......Respondent(s)
CRM M 39254 of 2011
Mahabir Chand .........Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab and another ........Respondents
Coram: Hon'ble Ms Justice Nirmaljit Kaur
-.-
Present: Mr. Peeush Gagneja, Advocate
for the petitioner in CRM M 39202 of 2011 and
for the respondent No. 2 in CRM M 39254 of 2011
Mr. K S Sidhu, DAG, Punjab
for the respondent State
Mr. Yogesh Aneja, Advocate
for the petitioner In CRM M 39254 of 2011 and
for respondent No. 2 in CRM M 39202 of 2011
-.-
1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be
allowed to see the judgement?
2. To be referred to the Reporter or not?
3. Whether the judgement should be reported in
the Digest?
Nirmaljit Kaur, J. (Oral)
Both the aforesaid petitions are being disposed of by this CRM M 39202 of 2011 -1- common order as the same arise out of the same FIR.
In CRM M 39202 of 2011, petitioner (Atma Ram) prayed for quashing of the FIR No. 188 dated 09.06.2008 under Sections 353, 186, 332 IPC, P S City Abohar District Ferozepur (now District Fazilka) which was got registered by Mahabir Chand (respondent No. 2 in CRM M 39202 of 2011), whereas, in CRM M 39254 of 2011, petitioner (Mahabir Chand) prayed for quashing of cross case registered vide rapat No. 13 dated 09.06.2008 in the said FIR on the statement of Atma Ram (respondent No. 2 in CRM M 39254 of 2011) on the basis of compromise having arrived at between the parties. Copy of the compromise dated 22.10.2011 is annexed with the petition as P2.
Vide this Court's order dated 05.01.2012, the parties were directed to appear before the trial Court on the date already fixed and the trial Court was also directed to record the statement of the parties and send its report to this Court whether the compromise is genuine or not.
In pursuance thereto, now the District and Sessions Judge, Ferozepur has forwarded the report dated 01.02.2012 of Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Abohar. In the said report, the Judicial Magistrate has reported that after recording the statements of the parties, it appears that the compromise is genuine.
Thus, this Court has no doubt that the matter has been amiably resolved. Therefore, allowing the criminal proceedings to continue would be nothing but a sheer misuse of process of law.
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 CRM M 39202 of 2011 -1- has observed as under:-
"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 reduced 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 exercising its power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C in the event of a compromise, but this is not to say power is limited to such cases. There can never be any such rigid rules to prescribe the exercise of such power."
The Apex Court in the case of 'Madan Mohan Abbot v. State of Punjab' reported as (2008)4 SCC 582 emphasised in para No. 6 as follows:-
"6. We need to emphasize 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."
Taking into account the allegations, compromise as well as report of the trial Court admitting the factum of the said compromise, there is no impediment in the way of this Court to quash the present FIR as well CRM M 39202 of 2011 -1- as cross case and subsequent proceedings arising out of the same in view of the above said settled proposition of law.
Accordingly, both the petitions are allowed and FIR No. 188 dated 09.06.2008 under Sections 353, 186, 332 IPC, P S City Abohar District Ferozepur (now District Fazilka) as well as cross case registered vide rapat No. 13 dated 09.06.2008 in the said FIR and subsequent proceedings arising out of the same are hereby quashed.
Allowed in the aforesaid terms.
Copy of the order be placed on the connected file.
(Nirmaljit Kaur) Judge 23.02.2012 mohan