Punjab-Haryana High Court
Bharam Dutt And Ors vs State Of Haryana And Others on 11 May, 2023
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:070836
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
219-2
Decided on :11.05.2023
I. CRM-M-17697-2023
Bharam Dutt and others
. . . Petitioner(s)
Versus
State of Haryana and others
. . . Respondent(s)
II. CRM-M-17828-2023
Satish Gaur and another
. . . Petitioner(s)
Versus
State of Haryana and others
. . . Respondent(s)
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH
PRESENT: Mr. Ankit Aggarwal, Advocate for the petitioners
in CRM-M-17697-2023 and for the respondent No. 2 to 4
in CRM-M-17828-2023.
Mr. Govind Chauhan, Advocate for the petitioners.
in CRM-M-17828-2023 and for the respondents No. 2 and 3
in CRM-M-17697-2023.
Mr. Pawan Kumar Jhanda, DAG, Haryana.
****
SANJAY VASHISTH, J. (Oral)
1. This order shall dispose of CRM-M-17697-2023 and CRM-M- 17828-2023, as the same have emanated out of same occurrence and prayer made therein is for quashing of criminal proceedings on the basis of compromise dated 03.04.2023 entered into between the affected parties.
2. It is a case of version and cross-version. Petitioners in CRM-M- 17697-2023 are seeking quashing of FIR No. 187, dated 07.06.2016 (Annexure P-1), for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 325, 506 1 of 7 ::: Downloaded on - 16-05-2023 23:44:16 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:070836 CRM-M-17697-2023 CRM-M-17828-2023 -2- IPC registered at Police Station Nissing, Karnal, and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom, whereas, petitioners in CRM-M-17828-2023 are seeking quashing of cross case vide FIR No. 187, dated 07.06.2016 (Annexure P-1), for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 325, 506 and 34 IPC registered at Police Station Nissing, Karnal and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise dated 03.04.2023 (Annexure P-3), arrived at between the parties.
3. When both the petitions came up for consideration before the co- ordinate Bench of this Court, vide order dated 13.04.2023, private parties were directed to appear before learned Tiral Court/Illaqa Magistrate for getting their respective statements recorded with regard to compromise dated 03.04.2023. However, vide order dated 13.04.2023, the co-ordinate Bench of this Court further directed to Ld. Chief Judicial Magistrate to record the statement of the Investigating Officer of this case.
4. In compliance thereof, the affected parties did appear before learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Karnal, and got recorded their respective statements with regard to the compromise. Learned Court below sent its separate reports dated 02.05.2023 alongwith statements of affected parties. Operative parts of the said reports are as under:-
Report dated 02.05.2023 in CRM-M-17697-2023 " On the basis of statements of petitioner/accused Bharam Dutt, Rajesh Kumar and Sher Singh and complainant Satish Gaur and Sunil Kumar undersigned is of the view that compromise between them is valid and has been effected without there being any kind of influence or coercion. It is further submitted that as per order dated 13.04.2023 passed by Hon'ble High Court in CRM-M-17697-2023, the following facts are reported as follows:-
(i) There are three accused namely Bharam Dutt, Rajesh 2 of 7 ::: Downloaded on - 16-05-2023 23:44:16 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:070836 CRM-M-17697-2023 CRM-M-17828-2023 -3- Kumar and Sher Singh in the present FIR.
(ii) The above-named accused were never declared proclaimed offender in the present case.
(iii) Yes, the compromise between the parties is valid and genuine and has been effected without there being any kind of influence or coercion.
(iv) No other criminal case is pending against them.
(v) There are three complainant/injured in the present FIR. "
Report dated 02.05.2023 in CRM-M-17828-2023:
""On the basis of statements of petitioner/accused Satish Gaur and Sunil Kumar and complainant Bharam Dutt, Rajesh Kumar and Sher Singh undersigned is of the view that compromise between them is valid and has been effected without there being any kind of influence or coercion. It is further submitted that as per order dated 13.04.2023 passed by Hon'ble High Court in CRM-M-17828-2023, the following facts are reported as follows:-
(i) There are two accused namely Satish Gaur and Sunil Kumar in the present FIR.
(ii) The above-named accused were never declared proclaimed offender in the present case.
(iii) Yes, the compromise between the parties is valid and genuine and has been effected without there being any kind of influence or coercion.
(iv) No other criminal case is pending against them.
(v) There are three complainant/injured in the present FIR. "
5. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioners as well as counsel for the respondents are ad-idem on the fact that mentioning of 'three accused/complainant/injured', in Report dated 02.05.2023 forwarded by learned Magistrate, Ist Class, Karnal in CRM-M-17697-2023 appears to be a typographic mistake because there are only two person affected i.e. one complainant and other is injured.
Counsel for the petitioners further submits that as per said 3 of 7 ::: Downloaded on - 16-05-2023 23:44:16 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:070836 CRM-M-17697-2023 CRM-M-17828-2023 -4- reports received from learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Karnal, dispute between the parties has been amicably resolved. He further submits that due to intervention of the respectable and elderly people of the society, the matter has been resolved and private parties have effected a compromise-deed dated 03.04.2023 (Annexure P-2). At present, there remains no dispute amongst the private parties. He further submits that in view of the compromise so effected between the private parties, pendency of the impugned FIR in both cases and consequential proceedings emanating therefrom would be sheer abuse of the process of law.
6. Learned counsel for the State after going through the statements and the report received from learned Court below, very fairly admits that the private parties have resolved their dispute and effected a compromise. He further submits that he has no objection if criminal proceedings are quashed on the basis of the compromise.
7. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record with their able assistance.
8. The Full Bench of this Court in the matter of Kulwinder Singh and others v. State of Punjab and another, 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052, has observed as under:-
"(28) To conclude, it can safely be said that there can never be any hard and fast category which can be prescribed to enable the Court to exercise its power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C.
The only principle that can be laid down is the one which has been incorporated in the Section itself, i.e., "to prevent abuse of the process of any Court" or "to secure the ends of justice". (29) In Mrs. Shakuntala Sawhney v. Mrs. Kaushalya Sawhney and others, Hon'ble Krishna Iyer, J. aptly summoned up the essence of compromise in the following words:
"The finest hour of justice arrives propitiously when parties, despite falling apart, bury the hatchet and weave a sense of fellowship of reunion."
4 of 7 ::: Downloaded on - 16-05-2023 23:44:16 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:070836 CRM-M-17697-2023 CRM-M-17828-2023 -5- (30) The power to do complete justice is the very essence of every judicial justice dispensation system. It cannot be diluted by distorted perceptions and is not a slave to anything, except to the caution and circumspection, the standards of which the Court sets before it, in exercise of such plenary and unfettered power inherently vested in it while donning the cloak of compassion to achieve the ends of justice.
(31) No embargo, be in the shape of Section 320(9) of the Cr.P.C., or any other such curtailment, can whittle down the power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C.
(32) The compromise, in a modern society, is the sine qua non of harmony and orderly behaviour. It is the soul of justice and if the power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. is used to enhance such a compromise which, in turn, enhances the social amity and reduces friction, then it truly is "finest hour of justice". Disputes which have their genesis in a matrimonial discord, landlord- tenant matters, commercial transactions and other such matters can safely be dealt with by the Court by exercising its powers under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. in the event of a compromise, but this is not to say that the power is limited to such cases. There can never be any such rigid rule to prescribe the exercise of such power, especially in the absence of any premonitions to forecast and predict eventualities which the cause of justice may throw up during the course of a litigation.
(33) 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.
(34) The power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. is to be exercised Ex-Debitia Justitia to prevent an abuse of process of Court. There can neither be an exhaustive list nor the defined para-meters to enable a High Court to invoke or exercise its inherent powers. It will always depend upon the facts and circumstances of each case. The power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. has no limits. However, the High Court will exercise it sparingly and with utmost care and caution. The exercise of power has to be with circumspection and restraint. The Court is a vital and an extra-ordinary effective instrument to maintain and control social order. The Courts play role of paramount importance in achieving peace, harmony and ever-lasting congeniality in society. Resolution of a dispute by way of a compromise between two warring groups, therefore, should attract the immediate and prompt attention of a Court which should endeavour to give full effect to the same unless such compromise is abhorrent to lawful composition of the society or would promote savagery."
5 of 7 ::: Downloaded on - 16-05-2023 23:44:16 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:070836 CRM-M-17697-2023 CRM-M-17828-2023 -6-
9. The said legal principles were also approved by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the matter of Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and another, (2012) 10 SCC 303. Furthermore, broad principles for exercising the powers under Section 482 were summarized by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the matter of Parbatbhai Aahir @ Parbatbhai Bhimsinhbhai Karmur and others v. State of Gujarat and another, (2017) 9 SCC 641.
10. Hon'ble the Supreme Court has held in the matter of Ramgopal and another v. State of Madhya Pradesh, 2021 SCC Online SC 834, that the matters which can be categorized as personal in nature or in the matter in which the nature of injuries do not exhibit mental depravity or commission of an offence of such a serious nature that quashing of which would override public interest, the Court can quash the FIR in view of the settlement arrived at amongst the parties. The observation of Hon'ble the Supreme Court is extracted as under:-
"19. We thus sum-up and hold that as opposed to Section 320 Cr.P.C. where the Court is squarely guided by the compromise between the parties in respect of offences 'compoundable' within the statutory framework, the extra- ordinary power enjoined upon a High Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. or vested in this Court under Article 142 of the Constitution, can be invoked beyond the metes and bounds of Section 320 Cr.P.C. Nonetheless, we reiterate that such powers of wide amplitude ought to be exercised carefully in the context of quashing criminal proceedings, bearing in mind: (i) Nature and effect of the offence on the conscious of the society; (ii) Seriousness of the injury, if any; (iii) Voluntary nature of compromise between the accused and the victim; & (iv) Conduct of the accused persons, prior to and after the occurrence of the purported offence and/or other relevant considerations."
11. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and going through 6 of 7 ::: Downloaded on - 16-05-2023 23:44:16 ::: Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:070836 CRM-M-17697-2023 CRM-M-17828-2023 -7- the material available on record, this Court finds that there appears to be substance in the submission of learned counsel that pendency of the present criminal litigation would be abuse of process of law since chances of conviction of accused persons are bleak in view of the compromise so effected between the private parties.
12. The report alongwith statements of the affected parties received from learned Court below would reveal that the aggrieved persons have genuinely effected a compromise and they have no objection if the impugned criminal proceedings are quashed.
13. Keeping in view totality of the facts and circumstances of the case and taking into consideration the ratio of the judgments in the cases of Gian Singh (supra), Ramgopal (supra) and Kulwinder Singh (supra), these petitions are allowed. Consequently, FIR No. 187, dated 07.06.2016 (Annexure P-1), for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 325, 506 IPC registered at Police Station Nissing, Karnal, and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom, and cross case vide FIR No. 187, dated 07.06.2016 (Annexure P-1), for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 325, 506 and 34 IPC registered at Police Station Nissing, Karnal , and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom, are hereby quashed, in view of compromise dated 03.04.2023.
14. These petitions stand disposed of accordingly.
(SANJAY VASHISTH) JUDGE 11.05.2023 Riya Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether Reportable: Yes/No Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:070836 7 of 7 ::: Downloaded on - 16-05-2023 23:44:16 :::