Navsangeet Singh @ Honey And Others v. State Of Punjab And Another
-1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision : 21.12.2023 Navsangeet Singh @ Honey and Others .....Petitioners
Versus
State of Punjab and Another .....Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ALKA SARIN Present :
Mr. K.B. Raheja, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Harjinder Singh Sidhu, AAG Punjab for respondent No.1. Mr. Amrit Pal Singh, Advocate for Mr. Ashish Aggarwal, Advocate for respondent No.2. ALKA SARIN, J. (Oral) 1.
The present petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for quashing of FIR No.48 dated 24.03.2021 registered under Sections 406, 494, 498-A, 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 at Police Station City Tarn Taran, District Tarn Taran, and all subsequent proceedings arising out of the said FIR, on the basis of compromise dated 10.01.2023 (Annexure P-2).
2.
On 21.09.2023 the following order was passed : "This is an application for preponment of the date of hearing of the main case from 21.12.2023 to an early date.
Notice of the application.
-2Mr. Adhiraj Singh Thind, AAG Punjab accepts notice on behalf of non-applicant/respondent No.1-State and Mr. Ashish Aggarwal, Advocate accepts notice on behalf of non-applicant/respondent No.2. They state that they have no objection if the present application is allowed. In view of the above, the present application is allowed. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the main case i.e. CRM-M-5085-2023 is taken on Board today itself.
CRM-M-5085-2023 The present petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for quashing of FIR No.48 dated 24.03.2021 under Sections 406, 494, 498-A, 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 registered at Police Station City Tarn Taran, District Tarn Taran, and all other consequential proceedings arising therefrom, on the ground that the parties have since compromised the matter vide compromise deed dated 10.01.2023 (Annexure P-2).
Learned counsel for the petitioners would contend that the present FIR is a result of matrimonial discord and now all disputes stand settled between the parties. The parties have filed a petition under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 wherein the statements of the first motion also stand recorded. Learned counsel would
-3further contend that the statements, which have been appended as Annexure P-2, clearly lay-down the terms and conditions of the settlement. Learned counsel for the petitioners has relied upon the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in "Gian Singh V/s State of Punjab & Anr." [2012 (10) SCC 303] and the Larger Bench's judgment of this Court in "Kulwinder Singh & Ors. Vs. State of Punjab & Anr." [2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052].
Notice of motion.
On the asking of the Court, Mr. Adhiraj Singh Thind, AAG Punjab accepts notice on behalf of respondent No.1-State and Mr. Ashish Aggarwal, Advocate accepts notice on behalf of respondent No.2. Copy of the petition has already been supplied to both the counsel. Learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2 states that all the disputes stand resolved between the parties and that respondent No.2 has no objection if the aforesaid FIR is quashed.
List on 21.12.2023.
Meanwhile, the parties are directed to appear before the concerned CJM/Illaqa Magistrate/Trial Court on 19.10.2023, or on any other date convenient to the Court, for recording of their statements. The CJM/Illaqa Magistrate/Trial Court is directed to record
-4the statements of the parties to its satisfaction qua the genuineness of the compromise and that the same is not the result of any undue influence, coercion or pressure of any kind. A report, along-with the statements of the parties, on the following points be sent to this Court before the next date of hearing :
1) Whether the settlement/compromise as recorded in the statements (Annexure P-2) has been freely entered into between the parties without any undue influence, coercion or pressure of any kind.
2) Whether any other criminal cases are pending against the parties.
3) Whether any proclamation proceedings are pending against either of the parties."
3.
Pursuant to the order dated 21.09.2023, a report dated 13.10.2023 of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Tarn Taran has been received by this Court wherein it has been stated that the statements of the parties have been recorded and the parties have stated that they have compromised the matter voluntarily without any threat, pressure, undue influence or fraud and that the complainant/respondent No.2 has no objection to the quashing of the present FIR. Statements of the parties have also been appended with the report.
4.
The Apex Court in the case of Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab & Anr. [2012 (10) SCC 303] has held as under : "57.The position that emerges from the above
-5discussion 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. In what cases power to quash the criminal proceeding or complaint or F.I.R may be exercised where the offender and victim have settled their dispute would depend on the facts and circumstances of each case and no category can be prescribed.
However, before exercise of such power, the High Court must have due regard to the nature and gravity of the crime. Heinous and serious offences of mental depravity or offences like murder, rape, dacoity, etc. cannot be fittingly quashed even though the victim or victim's family and the offender have settled the dispute. Such offences are not private in nature and have serious impact on society.
-6servants while working in that capacity etc; cannot provide for any basis for quashing criminal proceedings involving such offences. But the criminal cases having overwhelmingly and pre-dominatingly civil flavour stand on different footing for the purposes of quashing, particularly the offences arising from commercial, financial, mercantile, civil, partnership or such like transactions or the offences arising out of matrimony relating to dowry, etc. or the family disputes where the wrong is basically private or personal in nature and the parties have resolved their entire dispute.
In this category of cases, High Court may quash criminal proceedings if in its view, because of the compromise between the offender and victim, the possibility of conviction is remote and bleak and continuation of criminal case would put accused to great oppression and prejudice and extreme injustice would be caused to him by not quashing the criminal case despite full and complete settlement and compromise with the victim.
-7secure the ends of justice, it is appropriate that criminal case is put to an end and if the answer to the above question(s) is in affirmative, the High Court shall be well within its jurisdiction to quash the criminal proceeding."
5.
Learned counsel for the petitioners has also referred to the law laid down by this Court in Kulwinder Singh & Ors. vs. State of Punjab & Anr. [2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052] wherein it has been held that even in non-compoundable offences, if the parties have entered into a compromise, this Court has wide powers under Section 482 CrPC to quash the proceedings to prevent abuse of law and secure the ends of justice. 6.
In view of the above and keeping in view the report by the Trial Court that the parties have genuinely entered into a compromise and all the disputes between the parties have been resolved, it would not be in the interest of justice to continue the criminal proceedings. 7.
Resultantly, FIR No.48 dated 24.03.2021 registered under Sections 406, 494, 498-A, 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 at Police Station City Tarn Taran, District Tarn Taran is quashed, including all subsequent proceedings arising out of the said FIR, on the basis of compromise dated 10.01.2023 (Annexure P-2).
8.
The petition is accordingly allowed. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed off.
21.12.2023 (ALKA SARIN) Deepak patwal JUDGE NOTE: Whether speaking/non-speaking: Speaking Whether reportable: YES/NO