Punjab-Haryana High Court
Rajinder Singh @ Raju And Others vs State Of Haryana And Others on 25 May, 2022
Author: Vikas Bahl
Bench: Vikas Bahl
CRM-M-18394-2022 -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
(280)
CRM-M-18394-2022
Date of decision: - 25.05.2022
Rajinder Singh @ Raju and others
....Petitioners
Versus
State of Haryana and others
.....Respondents
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS BAHL
Present:- Mr. Pankaj Bali, Advocate, for the petitioners.
Mr. Praveen Bhadu, AAG, Haryana.
None for respondents No.2 and 3.
****
VIKAS BAHL, J. (ORAL)
This is a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. praying for quashing of FIR No.66 dated 23.05.2020 registered under Sections 186, 353, 506, 34 and 341 IPC at Police Station Jakhal, Fatehabad and all other consequential proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise.
On 02.05.2022, this Court was pleased to pass the following order:-
"This is a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. praying for quashing of FIR No.66 dated 23.05.2020 registered under Sections 186, 353, 506, 34, 341 IPC at Police Station Jakhal, Fatehabad and all other consequential proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise.
Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that all the persons concerned are party to the compromise.
Notice of motion for 25.05.2022.
On the asking of the Court, Mr.Munish Sharma, AAG, Haryana, accepts notice on behalf of respondent no.1.
The parties are directed to appear before the Illaqa 1 of 4 ::: Downloaded on - 27-05-2022 06:08:14 ::: CRM-M-18394-2022 -2- Magistrate/trial Court for recording their statements qua compromise within a period of 10 days.
The Illaqa Magistrate/trial Court is directed to submit a report on or before the next date of hearing containing the following information:-
1. Number of persons arrayed as accused.
2. Whether any accused is proclaimed offender?
3. Whether the compromise is genuine, voluntary and without any coercion or undue influence?
4. Whether the accused persons are involved in any other FIR or not?
5. The trial Court is also directed to record the statement of the Investigating Officer as to how many victims/complainants are there in the FIR.
Adjourned to 05.04.2022."
In pursuance of the said order, the report has been submitted by the Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Tohana, to the Registrar Judicial of this Court. The relevant part of the report is reproduced hereinbelow:-
"I have also inquired from both the parties, especially from complainant, who has stated that the compromise has been arrived at with the accused and the same is not due to any threat, coercion and undue influence from the accused side and is a volunteer act of the parties. It is further submitted by the IO namely Krishan Kumar ASI that there are only four accused in this case and accused were never declared proclaimed offender in this case and in any another case.
6. So, in view of the aforesaid facts, I am of the considered view that the compromise effected between the parties is without any threat or pressure from either of the sides and is a valid compromise.
Submitted please, (Manpreet Kaur Ghuman) JMIC/Tohana/21.05.2022 UID: HR 0503"
A perusal of the said report would show that statements of the concerned persons have been recorded in the case, who have stated 2 of 4 ::: Downloaded on - 27-05-2022 06:08:14 ::: CRM-M-18394-2022 -3- that the matter has been compromised and they have no objection in case the FIR in question is quashed. They have further stated that the said compromise is being entered into with there genuine, voluntarily and without any coercion or undue influence.
Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that there is no other FIR against the petitioners and they have not been declared proclaimed offender. Learned counsel for the State, as per instructions, has stated that this fact is correct.
This Court has heard the learned counsel for the parties and has perused the file.
After perusing the report submitted by the learned trial Court, this Court finds that the matter has been amicably settled between the petitioner and the complainant. Since the matter has been settled and the parties have decided to live in peace, this Court feels that in order to secure the ends of justice, the criminal proceedings deserve to be quashed.
As per the Full Bench judgment of this Court in "Kulwinder Singh and others Vs State of Punjab", 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052, it is held that High Court has power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to allow the compounding of non-compoundable offence and quash the prosecution where the High Court is of the opinion that the same is required to prevent the abuse of the process of law or otherwise to secure the ends of justice. This power of quashing is not confined to matrimonial disputes alone.
Hon'ble the Apex Court in the case of "Gian Singh Vs. State 3 of 4 ::: Downloaded on - 27-05-2022 06:08:14 ::: CRM-M-18394-2022 -4- of Punjab and another", 2012 (4) RCR (Criminal) 543, had also observed that in order to secure the ends of justice or to prevent the abuse of process of Court, inherent power can be used by this Court to quash criminal proceedings in which a compromise has been effected. The relevant portion of para 57 of the said judgment is reproduced hereinbelow:-
"57. The position that emerges from the above discussion can be summarised thus: the power of the High Court in quashing a criminal proceeding or FIR or complaint in exercise of its inherent jurisdiction is distinct and different from the power given to a criminal court for compounding the offences under Section 320 of the Code. Inherent power is of wide plenitude with no statutory limitation but it has to be exercised in accord with the guideline engrafted in such power viz; (i) to secure the ends of justice or (ii) to prevent abuse of the process of any Court. XXX---XXX"
In view of what has been discussed hereinabove, this petition is allowed and FIR No.66 dated 23.05.2020 registered under Sections 186, 353, 506, 34 and 341 IPC at Police Station Jakhal, Fatehabad and all the subsequent proceedings emanating therefrom are ordered to be quashed, qua the petitioners.
( VIKAS BAHL )
May 25, 2022 JUDGE
naresh.k
Whether reasoned/speaking? Yes
Whether reportable? No
4 of 4
::: Downloaded on - 27-05-2022 06:08:14 :::