Sajan Singh Sheen And Others v. State Of Punjab And Another

2024:PHHC:031043

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-4737 of 2024 Date of order: 04.03.2024 SAJAN SINGH SHEEN AND ORS.

.....Petitioners

Versus

STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER .....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA Present:- Mr. C.L. Verma, Advocate for the petitioners. Ms. Jagriti Kalia, AAG, Punjab.

Ms. Monika Jangra, Advocate for respondent No.2. *** Nidhi Gupta, J. (Oral) Prayer in the present petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is for quashing of FIR No.0188 dated 11.08.2022 (Annexure P-1) under Sections 406, 498-A and 354 IPC (Section 201 IPC added later on) registered at Police Station Haibowal, District Ludhiana and all other consequential proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of agreement/panchayati compromise deed and affidavit dated 15/16.01.2024 (Annexures P-2 & P-3).

Vide order dated 31.01.2024, a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court had directed the parties to appear before the concerned CJM/Illaqa Magistrate/Trial Court on 04.03.2024 for getting their statements recorded in terms of certain parameters given in the aforesaid order with regard to the agreement/panchayati compromise and affidavit dated 15/16.01.2024 (Annexures P-2 & P-3). However, due to typographical error, the order dated 31.01.2024 was modified/corrected and vide order dated 12.02.2024, the

[2] parties were directed to appear before the trial Court for recording their statements qua compromise on 16.02.2024 instead of 04.03.2024. In terms of the order dated 12.02.2024 passed by this Court, parties have appeared before the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Ludhiana to get their statements recorded. Learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Ludhiana has submitted her report dated 27.02.2024 along with the statements of the parties, which was duly forwarded by the learned District & Sessions Judge, Ludhiana to this Court.

A perusal of the above said report would show that the petitioners and respondent No.2 have appeared and suffered their statements with respect to the compromise, which have been found to be voluntary, genuine, and without any coercion or undue influence. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that as per the report, neither the petitioners are involved in any other criminal case nor are they declared absconders/proclaimed persons in the present case. Learned State counsel states that she has no objection in case the FIR is quashed on the basis of agreement/panchayati compromise deed and affidavit dated 15/16.01.2024 (Annexures P-2 & P-3) qua the petitioners. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 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 two parties.

This Court has heard learned counsel for the parties and has perused the file.

After perusing the report submitted by the learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Ludhiana, this Court finds that the matter has been amicably settled between the petitioners and respondent No.2. Since the

[3] 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 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."

[4] In view of what has been discussed hereinabove, the present petition is allowed and FIR No.0188 dated 11.08.2022 (Annexure P-1) under Sections 406, 498-A and 354 IPC (Section 201 IPC added later on) registered at Police Station Haibowal, District Ludhiana along with all other consequential proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of agreement/panchayati compromise deed and affidavit dated 15/16.01.2024 (Annexures P-2 & P-3), are ordered to be quashed qua the petitioners. (Nidhi Gupta) Judge 04.03.2024 'Amit'

Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether reportable :

Yes/No