Amandeep Singh (Minor) v. State Of Punjab And Others
2024:PHHC:022902 Page 1 of 4
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-4746-2021 (O&M) Date of order: 15.02.2024 Amandeep Singh .....Petitioner(s) Vs.
State of Punjab & Others .....Respondent(s)
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA Present:- Mr. O.P. Kamboj, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Sukhsandesh Singh Chahal, AAG Punjab.
Mr. Cyrus Chouhan, Advocate for respondents No.2 & 3.
***** Nidhi Gupta, J.
The prayer in this petition is for quashing of FIR No.321 dated 10.09.2020 (Annexure P-1) under Sections 363 and 366 IPC registered at Police Station City Muktsar, District Sri Muktsar Sahib; and all the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise dated 19.09.2020 (Annexure P2) and affidavit dated 19.09.2020 (Annexure P3).
Mr. Cyrus Chouhan, Advocate puts in appearance on behalf of respondents No.2 and 3 and files Power of Attorney, which is taken on record.
Vide order dated 02.02.2021, a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court had directed the parties to appear before Illaqa Magistrate for getting their statements recorded in terms of certain parameters given in
2024:PHHC:022902 Page 2 of 4 the aforesaid order dated 02.02.2021 with regard to the compromise dated 19.09.2020 (Annexure P2) and affidavit dated 19.09.2020 (Annexure P3). In terms of the order dated 02.02.2021 passed by a Coordinate Bench of this Court parties have appeared before the Court of learned Principal Magistrate, Juvenile Justice Board, Sri Muktsar Sahib and as per his report dated 10.03.2021 submitted to this Court, both the parties have got recorded their respective statements in Court. A perusal of the above said report would show that the petitioner, who is a juvenile; and respondents No.2/complainant/father of respondent No.3 herein; and respondent No.3/victim, have appeared and suffered statements with respect to the compromise, which have been found to be voluntary, genuine, and out of free will.
Learned counsel for the petitioner inter alia submits that present FIR was registered against the petitioner, however, with the intervention of respectables, both the parties have resolved the dispute vide compromise dated 19.09.2020 (Annexure P2) and affidavit dated 19.09.2020 (Annexure P3). It is further submitted that the petitioner was not declared proclaimed offender in the present case. Learned State Counsel and learned counsel for respondents No.2 and 3 do not dispute the above said submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner.
This Court has heard the learned counsel for the parties and has perused the file.
After perusing the report submitted by the Illaqa Magistrate, this Court finds that the matter has been amicably settled
2024:PHHC:022902 Page 3 of 4 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 proceedings 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 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
2024:PHHC:022902 Page 4 of 4 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."
In view of what has been discussed hereinabove, this petition is allowed; and FIR No.321 dated 10.09.2020 (Annexure P-1) under Sections 363 and 366 IPC registered at Police Station City Muktsar, District Sri Muktsar Sahib; and all the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise dated 19.09.2020 (Annexure P2) and affidavit dated 19.09.2020 (Annexure P3), are ordered to be quashed qua the petitioner.
Petition stands disposed of.
Pending application(s) if any also stand(s) disposed of. 15.02.2024 (Nidhi Gupta) Sunena Judge Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No