Punjab-Haryana High Court
Pardeep Puri And Ors vs State Of Punjab And Anr on 14 December, 2015
Author: Jaswant Singh
Bench: Jaswant Singh
262
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CRM-M No. 36029 of 2015 (O&M)
Date of Decision: 14.12.2015
Pardeep Puri and others
.......... Petitioners
Versus
State of Punjab and another
.......... Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH
Present: Mr. Ramandeep, Advocate
for the petitioners.
Mz. Rimplejeet Kaur, AAG, Punjab
for respondent No. 1/State alongwith HC Narain Gaur.
None for respondent No. 2/complainant.
****
JASWANT SINGH, J. (ORAL)
Present petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, is for quashing of FIR No. 108, dated 15.06.2015 (Annexure P-1) for offences punishable under Sections 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code, registered at Police Station Navi Baradari, District Jalandhar City and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise dated 08.10.2015 (Annexure P-2) arrived at between the parties.
As per allegations, inter alia, the accused/petitioners duped the complainant-Surjit Singh (respondent No. 2 herein) for sending his son, namely, Manpreet Singh, abroad Vide order dated 19.10.2015, this Court directed the learned Illaqa Magistrate/trial Court to send report with regard to compromise in pursuance of which, a report/letter No. 253G dated 07.12.2015 has been received from the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Jalandhar, which is taken on record as Mark-A. It is stated in the report that the complainant has arrived at a compromise with the accused-petitioners without any undue influence and pressure.
DINESH KUMAR2015.12.15 17:58 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh CRM-M No. 36029 of 2015 (O&M) -2-
Learned State Counsel, on instructions from HC Narain Gaur, submits that the the matter is still under investigation.
Hon'ble Supreme Court in (2003) 4 SCC 675, B.S Joshi & Others Vs. State of Haryana & Another has made it explicitly clear in para 15 of its judgment that the High Court in exercise of its inherent powers can quash criminal proceedings or FIR or complaint and Section 320 of the Code does not limit or effect the powers under Section 482 of the Code.
A Full Bench of this Court in Kulwinder Singh and others v. State of Punjab and another, 2007(3) RCR (Criminal) 1052 has held that this Court, in appropriate cases, while exercising powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C., may quash an FIR disclosing the commission of non compoundable offences. The relevant extracts read as under:-
" The only inevitable conclusion from the above discussion is that there is no statutory bar under the Cr.P.C., which can affect the inherent power of this Court under Section
482. Further, the same cannot be limited to matrimonial cases alone and the Court has the wide power to quash the proceedings even in non-compoundable offences notwithstanding the bar under Section 320 of the Cr.P.C., in order to prevent the abuse of law and to secure the ends of justice. "
Hon'ble Apex Court in another case in J.T 2008(9) S.C 192, Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation & Another while relying upon its decision in B.S. Joshi's case (supra) has also held that in view of the compromise arrived at between the parties, the technicalities should not be allowed to stand in the way in the quashing of criminal proceedings and the continuance of the same after compromise between the parties would be a futile exercise.
Similar views were expressed by Hon'ble the Apex Court in Madan Mohan Abot v. State of Punjab, 2008(4) SCC 582, the relevant extract of which is as under:-
" We need to emphasise that it is perhaps advisable that in DINESH KUMAR 2015.12.15 17:58 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh CRM-M No. 36029 of 2015 (O&M) -3- disputes where the question involved is of a purely personal nature, the court should ordinarily accept the terms of the compromise even in criminal proceedings as keeping the matter alive with no possibility of a result in favour of the prosecution is a luxury which the courts, grossly overburdened as they are, cannot afford and that the time so saved can be utilised in deciding more effective and meaningful litigation. This is a common sense approach to the matter based on ground of realities and bereft of the technicalities of the law. "
Keeping in view the above settled legal position and taking into account the fact that both the parties have desired to live in peace and harmony and carry on with their lives without any ill will or rancour by resolving their differences and entering into the aforesaid compromise, it is evident that 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 the FIR in the interest of justice.
Accordingly, the present petition is allowed. The aforesaid FIR and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom, are quashed.
December 14, 2015 ( JASWANT SINGH )
'dk kamra' JUDGE
DINESH KUMAR
2015.12.15 17:58
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this document
Chandigarh