Kuldeep Singh And ANR. v. State Of Punjab And Another

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

Date of Decision: 06.12.2022 Kuldeep Singh and another .... Petitioners

Versus

State of Punjab and another .... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR VERMA Present: - Mr. D.S. Kahlon, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. G.S. Sandhu, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab. Mr. Karan Sharma, Advocate for Mr. Manpreet Singh, Advocate for respondent No. 2. ASHOK KUMAR VERMA, J. (ORAL) The petitioners have filed the present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C., for quashing DDR No. 27 dated 25.07.2021 (Annexure P-1) registered under Sections 326, 224, 323 read with Section 34 IPC in case FIR No. 70 dated 03.07.2021 (Annexure P-2) under Sections 452, 326, 323 read with Section 34 IPC at Polcie Station Ghuman, Tehsil Batala, District Gurdaspur and all the consequential proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise (Annexure P-3). Pursuant to the orders dated 16.03.2022 and 28.04.

2022, passed by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court, the parties appeared before the learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Batala, to get their statements recorded. Learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Batala, has submitted his report along with statements of the parties vide letter No.

-206.06.2022 duly forwarded by the learned I/c District and Sessions Judge, Gurdaspur vide letter No. 11586/RKT dated 09.06.2022. I have heard learned Counsel for the petitioners, learned State Counsel, learned counsel for respondent No. 2 and gone through the relevant record.

It is now well settled that the High Court has inherent power to quash the criminal proceedings in non-compoundable cases on the basis of settlement between the parties for securing the ends of justice or to prevent abuse of the process where the possibility of conviction is remote and bleak and continuation of the criminal case would put the accused to great oppression and prejudice and extreme injustice would be caused to him by not quashing the criminal case. Criminal cases having overwhelmingly and predominantly civil character particularly those arising out of commercial transaction or arising out of matrimonial relationship or family dispute can be quashed when the parties have resolved their entire dispute among themselves.

However, such power cannot be exercised in those prosecutions which involve heinous and serious offences of mental depravity or offences like murder, rape dacoity, etc. which are not private in nature and have a serious impact on society. Similarly, prosecution for offences alleged to have been committed under special enactments like the Prevention of Corruption Act or the offences committed by public servant while working in that capacity cannot be quashed on the basis of compromise between the victim and the offender. For judicial precedents in this regard, reference may be made to Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab and anr.

-3549: Narinder Singh Vs. State of Punjab (Supreme Court) : 2014 (2) RCR (Criminal) 482, State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Laxmi Narayan and others (Supreme Court) : 2019 (2) RCR (Criminal) 255 and Kulwinder Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab and others (Punjab and Haryana High Court) : 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052.

According to the report, learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Batala, is satisfied that the compromise effected between the parties appears to be genuine and voluntary.

Considering the report of learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Batala and the fact that the compromise will bring peace and harmony between the parties, aforesaid DDR No. 27 dated 25.07.2021 (Annexure P-1) and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom, are quashed, qua petitioners, only.

Disposed of, accordingly.

December 06, 2022 (ASHOK KUMAR VERMA) rishu JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No