Punjab-Haryana High Court
Abhishek @ Abhishek Yadav And Others vs State Of Haryana And Others on 1 November, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
262
CRM-M-3700-2022
Date of Decision : 01.11.2022
Abhishek @ Abhishek Yadav and others .....Petitioners
Versus
State of Haryana and others .....Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR VERMA
Present : None.
****
ASHOK KUMAR VERMA, J. (ORAL)
Lawyers are abstaining from work today.
The petitioners have filed the present petition under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. for quashing of FIR No.47 dated 17.02.2021 registered under Sections 323, 325, 341 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 at Police Station Manesar, Gurugarm (Annexure P-1) and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise dated 21.12.2021 (Annexures P-2) effected between the private parties.
Pursuant to order dated 09.02.2022 passed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court, the private parties appeared before learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Gurugram to get their statements recorded. Learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Gurugram submitted his report along with copies of statements of the parties vide letter dated 18.04.2022 through learned District and Sessions Judge, Gurugram.
It is now well settled that the High Court has inherent power to quash the criminal proceedings in non-compoundable cases on the basis of settlement between the parties for securing the ends of justice or to prevent abuse of the process where the possibility of conviction is remote and bleak and continuation of the criminal case would put the accused to great oppression and prejudice and extreme injustice would be caused to him by not quashing the criminal case. Criminal cases having overwhelmingly and predominantly civil character particularly those arising out of commercial transaction or 1 of 2 ::: Downloaded on - 03-11-2022 03:25:50 ::: CRM-M-3700-2022 -2- arising out of matrimonial relationship or family dispute can be quashed when the parties have resolved their entire dispute among themselves. However, such power cannot be exercised in those prosecutions which involve heinous and serious offences of mental depravity or offences like murder, rape dacoity, etc. which are not private in nature and have a serious impact on society. Similarly, prosecution for offences alleged to have been committed under special enactments like the Prevention of Corruption Act or the offences committed by public servant while working in that capacity cannot be quashed on the basis of compromise between the victim and the offender. For judicial precedents in this regard, reference may be made to Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab and another : 2012(4) RCR Criminal) 543, Narinder Singh Vs. State of Punjab (Supreme Court) : 2014 (2) RCR (Criminal) 482, State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Laxmi Narayan and others (Supreme Court) : 2019 (2) RCR (Criminal) 255 and Kulwinder Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab and others (Punjab and Haryana High Court) : 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052.
According to the report, learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Gurugram is satisfied that compromise effected between the parties is genuine, outcome of free consent of the parties and is without coercion from any quarter.
Considering the report dated 18.04.2022 of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Gurugram and the fact that the compromise will bring peace and harmony between the parties, aforesaid FIR No.47 dated 17.02.2021 (Annexure P-1) and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom, are quashed, qua the petitioners only.
Disposed of, accordingly.
(ASHOK KUMAR VERMA)
01.11.2022 JUDGE
Kothiyal
Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No
Whether reportable Yes/No
2 of 2
::: Downloaded on - 03-11-2022 03:25:50 :::