Punjab-Haryana High Court
Chamkaur Singh And Ors vs State Of Punjab And Another on 19 July, 2022
CRM-M-1348-2020 (O&M) (1)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
263
CRM-M-1348-2020 (O&M)
Date of decision:19.07.2022
CHAMKAUR SINGH AND ORS ....Petitioners
Versus
STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS ...Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD S. BHARDWAJ
*****
Present : Mr. J.S Dhaliwal, Advocate for the petitioners.
Mr. Karanbir Singh, AAG, Punjab.
Mr. Ankit Rana, Advocate
Mr. Balwinder Singh Chahal, Advocate
for respondent No.2 and 3.
*****
VINOD S. BHARDWAJ. J. (ORAL)
By means of the instant petition, the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been invoked for seeking quashing of FIR No.129 dated 02.09.2019 under Sections 324, 323, 341, 148, 149 of the Indian Penal Code (offence under Section 326 of Indian Penal Code added later on) registered at Police Station Bhikhi, District Mansa (Annexure P-1) and all other consequential proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise dated 03.01.2020 (Annexure P-3) entered between the parties.
2 The parties were directed to appear before the learned trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate vide order dated 14.02.2022 and 26.05.2022 of this Court, to get their statements recorded regarding the compromise arrived at between the parties and a report in this regard was called for.
1 of 8
::: Downloaded on - 25-07-2022 21:57:21 :::
CRM-M-1348-2020 (O&M) (2)
3. Pursuant to the said order, report has been received from the Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Mansa vide Memo No.431 dated 22.03.2022. The relevant extract of the report is reproduced as under:-
" From the statements of complainant Pardeep Singh and joint statement of accused Chamkaur Singh, Sukhchain Singh, Jiwan Singh, Nanak Singh and Daana Singh, it comes out that the parties of the petition have compromised the matter with their free will and full senses. So this compromise between the parties to the petition appears to be genuine & valid and entered into by the parties voluntarily and its appears to be the outcome of their free consent and it is entered into by parties without any coercion or undue influence from any quarter.
However, it is pertinent to mention here that as per statement of SI Balbir Singh, there is another affected person namely Amandeep Singh s/o Major Singh, resident of Village Samao, Tehsil & District Mansa but he is not party to this petition pending before Hon'ble High Court as per memo of parties received to the Court of undersigned, nor the said person ever appeared before the Court of undersigned for getting recorded his any statement regarding any compromise between the parties.
4. A further report from JMIC, Mansa vide Memo No.1171 dated 13.07.2022 has also been received. The relevant extract of the said report is reproduced below:-
Statement of Amandeep Singh s/o Major Singh affected person recorded. Statements of complainant and all accused have already been recorded in this case on 02.03.2022.
From the statement of Amandeep Singh s/o Major Singh affected person, it makes out that the parties of the present petition have compromised the matter with their free will and full senses. So this compromise between the parties to the petition appears to be genuine & valid and it appears to be the outcome of free consent of the parties and is without coercion from any quarter.."
2 of 8
::: Downloaded on - 25-07-2022 21:57:21 :::
CRM-M-1348-2020 (O&M) (3)
5. 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.
6. Mr. Ankit Rana, Advocate appears on behalf of respondent No.2 and 3 and reiterates the settlement and his concurrence to the FIR and all the other consequential proceedings being quashed.
7. 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:
"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.
3 of 8
::: Downloaded on - 25-07-2022 21:57:21 :::
CRM-M-1348-2020 (O&M) (4)
(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 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 4 of 8 ::: Downloaded on - 25-07-2022 21:57:21 ::: CRM-M-1348-2020 (O&M) (5) 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.
8. 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 SCC 303'. Furthermore, 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'.
9. 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.
10. 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 5 of 8 ::: Downloaded on - 25-07-2022 21:57:21 ::: CRM-M-1348-2020 (O&M) (6) 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.
11. 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 CrPC:-
i. The dispute is arising from a scuffle between the parties resulting in injuries being caused to the complainant party.
Injuries are on the non-vital parts of the body of the injured persons;
ii. The petitioners are in their twenties and continued incarceration is likely to result in negative impact on their future prospects;
6 of 8
::: Downloaded on - 25-07-2022 21:57:21 :::
CRM-M-1348-2020 (O&M) (7)
iii. The challan has been presented but the charges have not been framed. The case is still at the initial stage as FIR was registered in the year 2019;
iv. The parties are residents of the same village and continuation of the proceedings is likely to spoil the peaceful atmosphere of the village;
v. 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;
vi. Continuation of the proceedings and forcing the parties to undergo rigours of criminal proceedings is not likely to sub- serve any large public interest;
vii.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 proceedings are likely to end in futility for want of parties to support the case of the prosecution;
viii.No larger public purpose would be served by continuation of the proceedings;
ix. 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.
x. The object of law is well served when the parties resolve their differences and choose to peacefully co-exist and live in 7 of 8 ::: Downloaded on - 25-07-2022 21:57:21 ::: CRM-M-1348-2020 (O&M) (8) harmony.
11. In view of the reports of Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Mansa 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. FIR No.129 dated 02.09.2019 under Sections 341, 324, 323, 148, 149 of the Indian Penal Code (Section 326 of Indian Penal Code added later on) registered at Police Station Bhikhi, District Mansa (Annexure P-1) and all other consequential proceedings arising therefrom, are hereby quashed qua the petitioners on the basis of compromise dated 03.01.2020 (Annexure P-2) entered between the parties. However, the same would be subject to payment of costs of Rs.5,000/- each to be deposited by the petitioners 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)
JUDGE
July 19, 2022
Amandeep
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No
Whether reportable : Yes/No
8 of 8
::: Downloaded on - 25-07-2022 21:57:21 :::