Seema v. Kulwinder Singh

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision : April 30, 2024 SEEMA .....Petitioner

VERSUS

KULWINDER SINGH .....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP TIWARI Present :

Mr. Lokesh Vohra, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Vansh Chawla, Advocate for the respondent. KULDEEP TIWARI, J. (Oral) 1.

The instant petition, as cast under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C., proffers the hereinafter extracted relief, as craved by the petitioner, inasmuch as, quashing of the Complaint No.COMI 348 of 2023 (precharge bearing No.NACT/867/2014) dated 24.12.2014, under Sections 138/142 of Negotiable Instruments Act, and under Sections 467 and 471 of IPC, added vide order dated 05.12.2023 on application for framing of charges (Annexure P-3), and all the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of a compromise dated 01.02.2024 (Annexure P-2), as entered into inter se the petitioner and the respondent/complainant.

2.

Upon an affirmative response from the learned counsel for the respondent/complainant qua the compromise (Annexure P-2), a Coordinate Bench of this Court had, through an order drawn on 26.02.2024, upon the instant petition, besides issuing notice, directed the parties to appear before the learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Ferozepur, for

-2getting their respective statements recorded qua authenticity of the compromise (Annexure P-2). Moreover, the trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate concerned was also directed to send a report in the above regard. 3.

Consequent to the making of the directions (supra), the parties appeared before the learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Ferozepur and got their respective statements recorded, thereby authenticating the compromise (Annexure P-2). Accordingly, in compliance of the directions (supra) of this Court, a Report bearing No.99 dated 30.03.2024 has been received from the learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Ferozepur, wherein, a satisfaction has been recorded by the Magistrate concerned qua the compromise (supra) being drawn in a genuine and voluntary and without any pressure or coercion and out of free will of the parties.

4.

Earlier the petitioner was declared as a proclaimed offender, but now she had surrendered before the learned trial Court concerned and was on bail.

5.

This Court have heard counsel for the parties and gone through the case file.

6.

A Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, in CRM-M-25669-2020 (O&M), titled "Abhishek Singh & others V/s State of Punjab & others", Pronounced on: 07.04.2022, while granting a similar relief, as craved in the instant petition, has observed as under:-

-3- "9. The following aspects would be relevant to conclude this petition:- a) The accused and the private respondents have amicably settled the matter between them in terms of the compromise deed and the statements recorded before the concerned Court;

b) A perusal of the documents reveal that the settlement has not been secured through coercion, threats, social boycotts, bribes, or other dubious means;

c) The victim has willingly consented to the nullification of criminal proceedings;

d) There is no objection from the private respondents in case present FIR and consequent proceedings are quashed;

e) In the given facts, the occurrence does not affect public peace or tranquillity, moral turpitude or harm the social and moral fabric of the society or involve matters concerning public policy;

f) The rejection of compromise may also lead to ill will. The pendency of trial affects career and happiness; g) There is nothing on the record to prima facie consider the accused as an unscrupulous, incorrigible, or professional offender;

h) The purpose of criminal jurisprudence is reformatory in nature and to work to bring peace to family, community, and society;

i) The exercise of the inherent power for quashing the conviction, sentence and all previous proceedings is justified to secure the ends of justice."

7.

In the light of the hereinabove recorded aspects and considering the fact that the offences, for which the petitioner/accused has

-4been charged, are not of grave in nature, as also in view of the law laid down in Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab and another, 2012 (4) RCR (Criminal) 543 and Kulwinder Singh, others Vs. State of Punjab 2007(3) RCR (Criminal) 1052, the present petition for quashing the FIR (supra) is hereby allowed.

8.

Resultantly, Complaint No.COMI 348 of 2023 (pre-charge bearing No.NACT/867/2014) dated 24.12.2014, under Sections 138/142 of Negotiable Instruments Act, and under Sections 467 and 471 of IPC, added vide order dated 05.12.2023 on application for framing of charges (Annexure P-3) and all the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom, are, hereby, quashed on the basis of a compromise dated 01.02.2024 (Annexure P-2), subject to payment of ₹5,000/- to be deposited with the District Legal Services Authority concerned.

(KULDEEP TIWARI) April 30, 2024 JUDGE R. Sharma Whether speaking/reasoned.

:

Yes/No Whether Reportable.

:

Yes/No