Punjab-Haryana High Court
Yuvraj Singh @ Yuvi And Ors vs State Of Haryana And Ors on 17 August, 2022
Author: Vikas Bahl
Bench: Vikas Bahl
CRM-M-30720-2022(O&M) -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
***
289 CRM-M-30720-2022(O&M)
Date of decision : 17.08.2022
YUVRAJ SINGH @ YUVI AND ORS ... Petitioners
Versus
STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS ... Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS BAHL
Present: Mr. S.S. Jattan, Advocate
for the petitioners.
Mr. Praveen Bhadu, AAG, Haryana.
Mr. Vinay Arya, Advocate for
Ms. Hasan Kaur, Advocate
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.104 dated 28.04.2022 registered under Sections 323, 325, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Sections 148, 149, 285 of the Indian Penal Code deleted and Sections 325 and 34 IPC added later on) at Police Station Sector-9 Ambala City, District Ambala (Annexure P-1) and all other consequential proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise dated 02.07.2022 (Annexure P-2).
On 18.07.2022, this Court was pleased to pass the following order:-
"This is a petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of FIR No. 104 dated 28.04.2022 registered under Sections 323, 325, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Sections 148, 149, 285 IPC deleted and 1 of 5 ::: Downloaded on - 24-08-2022 22:10:54 ::: CRM-M-30720-2022(O&M) -2- Sections 325 and 34 IPC added later on) at Police Station Sector-9 Ambala City, District Ambala (Annexure P-1) and subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise.
Notice of motion for 17.08.2022.
On advance notice, Mr. Bhupender Singh, DAG, Haryana appears and accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State and Ms. Hasan Kaur, Advocate appears on behalf of respondents No. 2 and 3 and filed her power of attorney, the same is taken on record. The parties are directed to appear before the Illaqa Magistrate/trial Court for recording their statements qua compromise within a period of 15 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.
18.07.2022 "
In pursuance to the said order, a report has been submitted by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Ambala. The relevant portion of the said report is reproduced hereinbelow:-
2. After careful perusal of the statement given on solemn affirmation by the complainants as well as accused concerning the present case and after careful analysis of the same, this court is convinced that the compromise between the parties in question is genuine and no such material is available on record which can reflect that the compromise has been effected under fear, threat,
2 of 5 ::: Downloaded on - 24-08-2022 22:10:55 ::: CRM-M-30720-2022(O&M) -3- pressure or coercion. Therefore, this court is of the thoughtful opinion that the available material on record is in favour to reflect a valid compromise between the parties.
3. After perusal of the case file, it is clear that no one is proclaimed offender/absconding in the present case. As per report under section 173 Cr.PC accused Yuvraj Singh @ Yuvi, Pushpinder Singh and Karmandeep Singh were arrayed as accused in the present case and except Jashandeep Singh and Andree Yadav, there is no other complainant/victim.
4. As per their statement, accused are not involved in any other case. Statement of investigating Officer has also been recorded in this regard.
5. Therefore, the above mentioned facts and circumstances, as part of report are detailed for your honour's kind information, please.
Submitted please.
(Dr. Mukesh Kumar) JMIC/Ambala.
27.07.2022."
A perusal of the above said report would show that the compromise in the present case has been found to be voluntarily, without any coercion or undue influence.
Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that there is no other FIR against the petitioners and they were not declared proclaimed offender in the present case.
Learned counsel for the State has stated that he has no objection in case the FIR is quashed on the basis of compromise.
Learned counsel for respondent Nos.2 and 3 has again reiterated that the matter has been settled and the said compromise is in the interest of all the persons and would help in bringing out peace and amity between the parties. He prayed that FIR and subsequent proceedings may be quashed.
3 of 5
::: Downloaded on - 24-08-2022 22:10:55 :::
CRM-M-30720-2022(O&M) -4-
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 feel that the same was 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. 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
4 of 5 ::: Downloaded on - 24-08-2022 22:10:55 ::: CRM-M-30720-2022(O&M) -5- 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.104 dated 28.04.2022 registered under Sections 323, 325, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Sections 148, 149, 285 of the Indian Penal Code deleted and Sections 325 and 34 IPC added later on) at Police Station Sector-9 Ambala City, District Ambala (Annexure P-1) and all other consequential proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise dated 02.07.2022 (Annexure P-2) are ordered to be quashed, qua the petitioner.
(VIKAS BAHL)
JUDGE
17.08.2022
Amandeep
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No
Whether reportable : Yes/No
5 of 5
::: Downloaded on - 24-08-2022 22:10:55 :::