Punjab-Haryana High Court
Liakat Ali And Anr vs State Of Punjab And Anr on 15 September, 2014
Author: Paramjeet Singh
Bench: Paramjeet Singh
-1-
CRM-M-13582-2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
Date of decision: 15.09.2014
1. CRM-M-13582-2013 (O & M)
Liakat Ali and another
.... Petitioner(s)
Versus
State of Punjab and another
.... Respondent(s)
AND
2. CRM-M-22831-2014
Gurpreet Singh
.... Petitioner(s)
Versus
State of Punjab and another
.... Respondent(s)
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PARAMJEET SINGH
1) Whether Reporters of the local papers may be
allowed to see the judgment?
2) To be referred to the Reporters or not?
3) Whether the judgment should be reported in the
Digest?
Present: Mr. Jai Bhagwan, Advocate,
for the petitioners. (in both petitions).
Mr. Nikhil K. Chopra, DAG, Punjab.
Mr. Aseem Kataria, Advocate,
for respondent no.2 (in both petitions).
*****
PARVEEN KUMAR
2014.09.17 10:52
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
-2-
CRM-M-13582-2013
PARAMJEET SINGH, J. (ORAL)
By this common judgment, I intend to dispose of CRM-M- 13582-2013, titled 'Liakat Ali and another vs. State of Punjab and another' and CRM-M-22831-2014, titled 'Gurpreet Singh vs. State of Punjab and another', as in both these petitions, prayer has been made for quashing of case FIR No.92 dated 26.08.2012, registered at Police Station City Malerkotla, District Sangrur, under Sections 457/456/448/380/511/427/148/149 of the Indian Penal Code, on the basis of compromise dated 03.04.2013 (Annexure P-2 in CRM-M- 13582-2013) and dated 24.05.2014 (Annexure P-2 in CRM-M-22831- 2014), alongwith all the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom.
Vide order dated 02.07.2013 (in CRM-M-13582-2013) and 21.07.2014 (in CRM-M-22831-2014), parties were directed to appear before Illaqa Magistrate/trial Court on 22.07.2013 to get their statements recorded with regard to compromise and the Illaqa Magistrate was directed to send the report.
In compliance of the aforesaid orders, the Illaqa Magistrate/trial Court has submitted report which indicates that parties appeared before it and got recorded their respective statements with regard to validity of compromise. As per the report, compromise arrived at between the parties is genuine and without any pressure or coercion from any corner. Now no dispute is pending between the parties.
Learned counsel for the parties state that the trial is still pending and till date, conviction has not been recorded by the Court. PARVEEN KUMAR 2014.09.17 10:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document -3- CRM-M-13582-2013 Consequently, in view of compromise dated 03.04.2013 (Annexure P-2 in CRM-M-13582-2013) and dated 24.05.2014 (Annexure P-2 in CRM-M-22831-2014) and keeping in view the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Madan Mohan Abbot vs. State of Punjab, 2008(2) RCR (Criminal) 429, Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab and another, 2012(4) R.C.R.(Criminal) 543, Narinder Singh and others vs. State of Punjab and another, 2014(2) R.C.R.(Criminal) 482 and Full Bench judgment of this Court in the case of Kulwinder Singh and others vs. State of Punjab and another, 2007 (3) RCR (Crl.) 1052, no useful purpose would be served in prolonging the litigation, especially when this case does not fall within the category of exceptional cases where this Court should not exercise its inherent jurisdictional power to quash the criminal proceedings, as held in Gian Singh (supra) and Narinder Singh and others (supra). In the facts and circumstances of this case, it would be unfair or contrary to the interest of justice to continue with the criminal proceedings or continuation of the criminal proceedings would amount to abuse of process of law despite settlement and compromise between the victim and wrongdoer and to secure the ends of justice, therefore, it is appropriate that criminal case is put to an end.
Both the petitions are allowed. FIR No.92 dated 26.08.2012, registered at Police Station City Malerkotla, District Sangrur, under Sections 457/456/448/380/511/427/148/149 of the Indian Penal Code, is hereby quashed, on the basis of compromise dated 03.04.2013 PARVEEN KUMAR 2014.09.17 10:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document -4- CRM-M-13582-2013 (Annexure P-2 in CRM-M-13582-2013) and dated 24.05.2014 (Annexure P-2 in CRM-M-22831-2014), and all the criminal proceedings arising out of the said FIR also stand quashed.
It is, however, made clear that if the proceedings already stand concluded and conviction recorded in the present case, this order shall be treated non est and, thus, will have no bearing on the conviction and sentence order.
(PARAMJEET SINGH) 15.09.2014 JUDGE parveen kumar PARVEEN KUMAR 2014.09.17 10:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document