Punjab-Haryana High Court
Hardeep Singh And Others vs State Of Punjab And Others on 9 December, 2013
Author: Ritu Bahri
Bench: Ritu Bahri
Crl. Misc. No. M-23286 of 2013 (O&M)
Crl. Misc. No. M-25667 of 2013 (O&M) -1-
]IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
1. Crl. Misc. No. M-23286 of 2013 (O&M)
Hardeep Singh and others ....Petitioners
versus
State of Punjab and others ...Respondents
2. Crl. Misc. No. M-25667 of 2013 (O&M)
Jagir Singh and others ....Petitioners
versus
State of Punjab and others ...Respondents
Date of decision : 09.12.2013
CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI
Present: Mr. N.P.S. Mann, Advocate
for the petitioners in Crl. Misc. No. M-23286 of 2013 and
for respondent Nos. 2 to 6 in Crl. Misc. No. M-25667 of 2013
Ms. Sarika Gupta, Advocate
for the petitioners in Crl. Misc. No. M-25667 of 2013 and
for respondent Nos. 2 to 9 in Crl. Misc. No. M-23286 of 2013
Mr. Daljeet Singh Virk, AAG, Punjab
****
RITU BAHRI , J. (Oral)
By this common order, Crl. Misc. No. M-23286 of 2013 & Crl. Misc No. M-25667 of 2013 shall be decided together wherein prayer is for quashing of F.I.R No. 202 dated 02.10.2002 under Sections Arora Gaurav 2014.01.08 14:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Crl. Misc. No. M-23286 of 2013 (O&M) Crl. Misc. No. M-25667 of 2013 (O&M) -2- 326/324/323/148/149 IPC, registered at Police Station City Nawanshahar, Moga, Distt. Shaheed Bhagat Singh Nagar as well as quashing of judgment of conviction as well as order sentence dated 21.03.2011 and cross case under Sections 323/324/148/149 IPC, registered at Police Station City Nawanshahar, Distt. Shaheed Bhagat Singh Nagar and subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise dated 03.08.2012.
The F.I.R and the cross case under different Sections were got registered by the parties herein against each other. On 29.09.2002, Jagir Singh along with his driver Jagtar Singh went to their plot and at that time Swaran Singh and his son Harjap Singh, Gurbachan Singh and Manjit Kaur were raising a construction with bricks over some part of their plot. When Jagir Singh and his driver stopped them, they started giving blows with their respective weapons. On raising hue and cry. Manjit Singh reached on the spot and the accused ran away from the spot along with their respective weapons. In self defence, they also caused injuries to the accused. Hence, the F.I.R and the cross case was registered against both the parties.
The trial Court, after going through the evidence led by the prosecution, convicted the accused-petitioners and sentenced them as Arora Gaurav 2014.01.08 14:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Crl. Misc. No. M-23286 of 2013 (O&M) Crl. Misc. No. M-25667 of 2013 (O&M) -3- under:-
Hardeep U/S 326/324/323/34 IPC Rigorous imprisonment substantially for a period of 2½ years Singh Swaran U/S 326/324/323/34 IPC Rigorous imprisonment substantially for a period of 2½ years Singh Manjit U/S 326/324/323/34 IPC Rigorous imprisonment substantially for a period of 2½ years Kaur Ranjit U/S 326/324/323/34 IPC Rigorous imprisonment substantially for a period of 2½ years Singh Jagir U/S 148/324/323/149 IPC Rigorous imprisonment substantially for a period of 1½ years Singh Manjit U/S 148/324/323/149 IPC Rigorous imprisonment substantially for a period of 1½ years Singh Joga Singh U/S 148/324/323/149 IPC Rigorous imprisonment substantially for a period of 1½ years Jagtar U/S 148/324/323/149 IPC Rigorous imprisonment substantially for a period of 1½ years Singh Harbhajan U/S 148/324/323/149 IPC Rigorous imprisonment substantially for a period of 1½ years Singh Gurdial U/S 148/324/323/149 IPC Rigorous imprisonment substantially for a period of 1½ years Singh Kamaldee U/S 148/324/323/149 IPC Rigorous imprisonment substantially for a period of 1½ years p Singh Satwant U/S 148/324/323/149 IPC Rigorous imprisonment substantially for a period of 1½ years Singh During the pendency of the appeal before the lower Appellate Court, with the intervention of the parties, a compromise (Annexure P-3) has been effected between the parties.
In this regard, parties were directed to get their statements recorded before the trial Court.
In compliance of the order 24.07.2013 and 12.08.2013, report of Addl. Chief Judl. Magistrate, Shaheed Bhagat Singh Nagar has been received. As per report, statements of the parties have been recorded. Statement of Swaran Singh who is the complainant of F.I.R Arora Gaurav 2014.01.08 14:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Crl. Misc. No. M-23286 of 2013 (O&M) Crl. Misc. No. M-25667 of 2013 (O&M) -4- No. 202 dated 02.10.2012 and statement of witnesses Hardeep Singh, Manjit Kaur and Ranjit Singh, have been recorded to the effect that they have effected a compromise with the petitioners in F.I.R i.e Jagir Singh, Manjit Singh, Joga Singh, Jagtar Singh, Harbhajan Singh, Gurdial Singh, Kamaldeep Singh and Satwant Singh. The compromise is voluntarily for the betterment of the parties without any pressure. Copy of compromise is Ex C1. Both the parties have admitted the factum of compromise and submitted that they will maintain peace and harmony. They have no objection if the cross case and F.I.R be quashed against the parties.
Taking into account that the compromise has been effected between the parties and the compromise deed is dated 03.08.2012 placed on record in both the petitions whereby the parties have decided to get the F.I.R and cross case quashed, it is a fit case where there is no impediment in the way of the Court to exercise its inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C for quashing of F.I.R and cross case in the interest of justice.
A Division Bench of this Court in Sube Singh and another Vs. State of Haryana and another, 2013 (4) RCR (Criminal) 102, had examined a case, where after conviction, the dispute between the Arora Gaurav 2014.01.08 14:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Crl. Misc. No. M-23286 of 2013 (O&M) Crl. Misc. No. M-25667 of 2013 (O&M) -5- parties had been settled. It was a case, registered under Sections 420, 467, 468 read with Section 120-B IPC. While quashing the proceedings in the said case, the Division Bench of this Court, observed as under:-
"17. The magnitude of inherent jurisdiction exercisable by the High Court under Section 482 Criminal Procedure Code with a view to prevent the abuse of law or to secure the ends of justice, however, is wide enough to include its power to quash the proceedings in relation to not only the non-compoundable offences notwithstanding the bar under Section 320 Criminal Procedure Code, but such a power, in our considered view, is exercisable at any stage save that there is no express bar and invoking of such power is fully justified on facts and circumstances of the case."
In the facts and circumstances of the present case, the dispute with regard to offence under Section 326/324/323/148/149 IPC, was private in nature and the parties have now compromised the matter. The dispute has now been resolved and the Court is satisfied that after recording the statements made by both the parties, the compromise is voluntary and has been effected without coercion and pressure.
Consequently, in view of the status report and the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Madan Mohan Abbot vs. State of Punjab, 2008,(2) RCR (Criminal) 429, the law laid down by the Arora Gaurav 2014.01.08 14:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Crl. Misc. No. M-23286 of 2013 (O&M) Crl. Misc. No. M-25667 of 2013 (O&M) -6- Full Bench of this Court in the case of Kulwinder Singh and Ors. vs. State of Punjab and another ,2007(3) RCR (Crl.) 1052 and the judgment delivered by a Division Bench of this Court in Sube Singh's case (supra), this Court is of the view that no useful purpose would be served in prolonging the litigation.
Accordingly, F.I.R No. 202 dated 02.10.2002 under Sections 326/324/323/148/149 IPC, registered at Police Station City Nawanshahar, Moga, Distt. Shaheed Bhagat Singh Nagar and cross case under Sections 323/324/148/149 IPC, registered at Police Station City Nawanshahar, Moga, Distt. Shaheed Bhagat Singh Nagar, is quashed with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom qua the petitioners. Resultantly, the appeal preferred by the petitioners against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 21.03.2011, would be rendered infructuous and shall be so declared by the first Appellate Court.
The petitions stands disposed of.
09.12.2013 (RITU BAHRI) G.Arora JUDGE Arora Gaurav 2014.01.08 14:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document