Punjab-Haryana High Court
Rupinderjeet Singh vs State Of Punjab And Another on 4 April, 2022
Author: Vikas Bahl
Bench: Vikas Bahl
CRM-M-8307-2022 (O&M) 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
265
CRM-M-8307-2022 (O&M)
Decided on : 04.04.2022
Rupinderjeet Singh Sandhu
. . . Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab and another
. . . Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS BAHL
PRESENT: Mr. Shivya Sehgal, Advocate
for the petitioner.
Mr. Sukhbeer Singh, AAG, Punjab.
Mr. Naresh Kumar Paul, Advocate
for respondents No. 2.
****
VIKAS BAHL, J. (Oral)
CRM-7044-2022 Allowed as prayed for.
Annexures P-1 and P-2 are placed on record subject to all just exceptions.
Main Case This is a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of FIR No. 21 dated 06.02.2020 under Sections 436, 457, 380, 511, 427 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code,1860 registered at Police Station Sarabha Nagar, District Ludhiana (Annexure P-1) and all subsequent proceedings arising on the basis of the compromise.
When the matter came up before this Court on 17.03.2022, 1 of 6 ::: Downloaded on - 12-07-2022 02:50:19 ::: CRM-M-8307-2022 (O&M) 2 the following order was passed:-
"CRM-9472-2022 This is an application filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. for preponement of the date of hearing in the main case which is now stated to be listed for 28.03.2022 to an early date.
Learned counsel for the applicant-petitioner has submitted that the present matter has been compromised and the statements of the parties are to be recorded.
Notice in the application.
On advance notice, Mr. Sarabjit S. Cheema, AAG, Punjab, appears and accepts notice on behalf of the non- applicant/State of Punjab and Mr. Nagesh Kumar Paul, Advocate appears on behalf of non applicant/respondent No.2 and have submitted that they have no objection in case the present application is allowed and the date of hearing in the main case is preponed from 28.03.2022 to today.
In view of the aforesaid facts and no objection from the opposite side, the present application is allowed and the date of hearing in the main case is preponed from 28.03.2022 to today and the same is taken on Board today itself.
Main case This is a petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. for quashing of FIR No.21 dated 06.02.2020 registered under Sections 436, 457, 380, 511, 427, 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 at Police Station Sarabha Nagar, District Ludhiana (Annexure P-1) and all the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that all the persons concerned are party to the compromise.
2 of 6 ::: Downloaded on - 12-07-2022 02:50:20 ::: CRM-M-8307-2022 (O&M) 3 Notice of motion for 04.04.2022.
On asking of the Court, Mr. Sarabjit S. Cheema, AAG, Punjab appears and accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State and Mr. Nagesh Kumar Paul, Advocate appears on behalf of respondent No.2.
The parties are directed to appear before the Illaqa Magistrate/trial Court for recording their statements qua compromise within a period of 12 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."
In pursuance of the said order, a report has been submitted by the Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Ludhiana to the Registrar General of this Court. The relevant portion of the said report is reproduced hereinbelow:-
"In view of the above referred statements, after hearing the parties and going through the record, report is submitted as under:
1) This case was registered against one Rupinderjeet Singh.
2) The accused Rupinderjeet Singh is not Proclaimed offender.
3 of 6 ::: Downloaded on - 12-07-2022 02:50:20 ::: CRM-M-8307-2022 (O&M) 4
3) Compromise effected between complainant Harbans Singh and accused Rupinderjeet Singh is genuine, voluntarily and without any coercion or undue influence. The complainant stated that he has no objection if FIR is quashed against the accused.
4) The accused person is not involved in any other FIR.
5) As per the statement of investigating officer there is one complainant/victim i.e Harbans Singh.
Report in the matter is accordingly submitted for kind consideration and for further necessary directions, if any. Statements and documents, referred above, are also enclosed herewith for kind consideration."
A perusal of the said report would show that it has been stated that the statements of the complainant as well as the accused have been recorded in the case and both have stated that the matter has been compromised and they have no objection in case the FIR is quashed. It is further stated that the statement of the complainant has been made voluntarily without any fear, coercion or pressure.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner was never declared proclaimed offender in the present case and is not involved in any other case.
Learned counsel for the State, as per instructions, has stated that these facts are correct.
4 of 6 ::: Downloaded on - 12-07-2022 02:50:20 ::: CRM-M-8307-2022 (O&M) 5 Learned counsel for respondent No. 2 has reiterated the factum of compromise and has prayed for quashing of FIR on the basis of the same.
This Court has heard the learned counsel for the parties and has perused the file. After perusing the report submitted by the 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 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.
5 of 6 ::: Downloaded on - 12-07-2022 02:50:20 ::: CRM-M-8307-2022 (O&M) 6 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, the petition is allowed and FIR No. 21 dated 06.02.2020 under Sections 436, 457, 380, 511, 427 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code,1860 registered at Police Station Sarabha Nagar, District Ludhiana (Annexure P-1) and all subsequent proceedings arising on the basis of the compromise, are ordered to be quashed, qua the petitioner.
(VIKAS BAHL)
th
April 4 , 2022 JUDGE
Mehak
Whether reasoned/speaking? Yes/No
Whether reportable? Yes/No
6 of 6
::: Downloaded on - 12-07-2022 02:50:20 :::