Parmvir Singh v. State Of Punjab And Another

 
     
 



!

"#$#%& ' ' ( )  * 
























'''

#% ),$ *    

''' $-%!

% $
&

./ '

*
 0 
 




  

 





 !

"
  
 
#

$


0 
 '

2/3 %


 


&'$
 
 
(

)*+

,$-

.- -/ $-$,



$0/
..0
..'
&$0
*

 

 
 

1 

2

 (
 

 3


!

 3 45
6$7

1



)*+



$'

-/ $-$,

!


'

--

  
3

%
+ 
1 
2 
  "


 3 
!





"
 




3 
"6

 !
#

16$&668-,$
!

"

"
!"
  


3 
"
47


 3


!

16-0696..&/
 


 3
 
 
!"


  




3 
"


"
 





!
 
#

$: 3

3

3

 3
; ,0 -$ $-$$

 


 

3  



 


! 

*(
:
 


 
 3


 
 
"

!



"



3






!


 
"


 



 



 


 
!  
5


 *






 
 




/-8
:2+<

,, -.

$-$$

!
!3
!"

2

* 
2



 
%




 
  
! 6 =








      

    



 



  ! 

   "   #  $

 

   %   & *
 3




$.

,, $-$$



  "




!3


 



! 3


 


,0.



"
!  



 

 3
2 *
2
 
  
3


 
 

!
 









3

!
 3

 3: 

$

 !  



)*+

( 

(
%"
 




 3


 "

 
"

 




 
 

 

!3



  )*+



 

 

 
!

  3






"





  
 




>



 
 




 
 
!3
!"


 

 



3

! 3!"

!

 


 3





( 



  


!"



3

 


!"



 3


3!"

% 



!


 









3
 


!
(

 
&'$

 



3



 

>
  



 


 


&'$

 


(

) *





 6 3 !


 
!

! 









)
1
3


 

'




    

 

!

"#


 6
'(   ) 

 

  ) ) 

   #   

 

 

  *  

     !      *

           +

   ,       "-./ !

 !      

  01 !

 ! 1 

   

2

    #

 



  01 !

 !

   

     



  

3

  34

  



 



  5 

      

    !  *



 01 !

 !  

 

  

   

    

    

  *

          

    

       

 

  

.   

  



 

    !

 !    

           

 !       01 6     

 

  !     2 

  5   

      "

!

 !  

       "    01 !

 !

 *

7*54 8 

  



!     * 

 

  

  !  + *

   

  #                

      01  !

 ! 

!

  *     

                      

      5    9 

          

      

   

     

 !      

  



 

 

 

   & > ?!

5
 




'$



%

     "

&

!

#& 
 !6
':( 

  

  



 

 

 ;  ! 2 

 6#9   *

 )







    



  

  " !# 



      

      *

          <=- /     -

/

 



! #  2 



   6#9  *

 

 

    

 

            

                    

    *

    !          

  



  

 

 +   

  

 2 

 > 

  

 

  

  



  

 

  

  

    +

 !

 ? 

            =

   

2 

  

 @

     

5      



 

2   





   

       

 +  



  

     

   

 





         



#

    !  2 



   

 

  

  

  +         

               



) *   )     2 

 

  

 

  #    !   

  

 

     )             

 

  

  

  





  

 

                    )    







    2 - /



  !  

2 

& > @!
5
 

!

' (   )* +, ! - (

".

/00 


  

3
  
! 12 '******

12. Now so far as the conflict between the decisions of this Court in the cases of Narinder Singh (supra) and Shambhu Kewat (supra) is concerned, in the case of Shambhu Kewat (supra), this Court has noted the difference between the power of compounding of offences conferred on a court under Section 320 Cr.P.C. 1973, and the powers conferred under Section 482 Cr.P.C. 1973 for quashing of

criminal proceedings by the High Court. In the said decision, this Court further observed that in compounding the offences, the power of a criminal court is circumscribed by the provisions contained in Section 320 Cr.P.C. and the court is guided solely and squarely thereby, while, on the other hand, the formation of opinion by the High Court for quashing a criminal proceedings or criminal complaint under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is guided by the material on record as to whether ends of justice would justify such exercise of power, although ultimate consequence may be acquittal or dismissal of indictment. However, in the subsequent decision in the case of Narinder Singh (supra), the very Bench ultimately concluded in paragraph 29 as under:

xxx....xxx 29.7. While deciding whether to exercise its power under Section 482 of the Code or not, timings of settlement play a crucial role. Those cases where the settlement is arrived at immediately after the alleged commission of offence and the matter is still under investigation, the High Court may be liberal in accepting the settlement to quash the criminal proceedings/investigation. It is because of the reason that at this stage the investigation is still on and even the charge-sheet has not been filed. Likewise, those cases where the charge is framed but the evidence is yet to start or the evidence is still at infancy stage, the High Court can show benevolence in exercising its powers favourably, but after prima facie assessment of the circumstances/material mentioned above.

xxx....xxx"

*



 

2

)

2
 3
45
6$7




 

 
 




 
 
!

!"
  
 
% 

 

 
)*+
#

,$-
 .- -/ $-$,



$0/
..0
..'
&$0

*
 

 
 
1 

2



!(  
3
 3
 

 ( 3 
(

 

20 
3

 ,A -$ $-$.

?)A 

B + %   C B   C %,