Manjit Kaur & ORS. v. State Of Punjab & ANR.

CRM-M No.20053 of 2017 -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M No.20053 of 2017 (O&M) Date of decision : 3.10.2018 ...

Manjit Kaur and others ................Petitioners vs.

State of Punjab and another .................Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice H. S. Madaan Present: Mr. Vikas Gupta, Advocate for Mr. Sanjiv Gupta, Advocate for the petitioners. Ms. Samina Dhir, DAG Punjab.

...

H. S. Madaan, J.

Petitioners - Manjit Kaur and others have brought the instant petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of FIR No. 40 dated 17.5.2016, for offences under Sections 328, 354, 120-B IPC and Sections 55(A), 66(B), 67 and 67(A) of Information Technology Act, 2000, registered at Police Station Bhadson, District Patiala, against them, alongwith consequential proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise, stated to have been effected between them and complainant Mandeep Kaur - arrayed as respondent No.2.

CRM-M No.20053 of 2017 -2When the petition came up for hearing on 1.6.2017, notice of motion was ordered to be issued. The respondent No. 1 - State of Punjab through State counsel, whereas respondent No.2 through Mr. Gaurav Singla, Advocate, had put in appearance. Then in light of the contention that parties have since effected compromise, they were directed to put in appearance before the trial Court to get their statements recorded with regard to compromise and the trial Court was directed to send a report to this Court.

Report has been received from Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Nabha, in terms of which complainant Mandeep Kaur and accused, namely, Manjit Kaur, Sameer Khan and Saleem Khan @ Chhaju Khan had appeared there and their statements were recorded, in terms of which they have admitted to have entered into a voluntary compromise, with free will, without any pressure, coercion or undue influence. Further complainant has stated that she has no objection if the FIR in question is quashed by this Court. Affidavit of fourth accused Parminder Singh with regard to the compromise has been placed on the record. There is nothing on record to doubt the genuineness of the compromise so arrived at between the parties. It has been reported that no accused has been declared proclaimed offender in the FIR in question. Alongwith the report statement of the complainant and the accused party, in original, have been annexed.

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned State counsel, besides going through the record.

CRM-M No.20053 of 2017 -3As informed by the State counsel, a cancellation report in the matter has been prepared and filed in the Court, which is still pending.

The dispute between the parties has been resolved amicably, which appears to have been arrived at between them voluntarily without any threat or coercion and in terms of ratio of the authority reported as Kulwinder Singh and others vs. State of Punjab and others 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052, where in para 28, it has been held as under :- "The compromise, in a modern society, is the sine qua non of harmony and orderly behaviour. It is the soul of justice and if the power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. is used to enhance such a compromise which, in turn, enhances the social amity and reduces friction, then it truly is "finest hour of justice"."

It has been observed that High Court has power to quash prosecution in order to achieve ends of justice and to prevent abuse of process of law. Though such powers are unlimited but those are to be exercised sparingly and with utmost care and caution. Though there is no statutory bar which can effect the inherent power of High Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

The compromise is in interest of peace and tranquility in the society and for such like reasons this Court can quash the FIR and ancillary proceedings exercising power under Section 482 Cr.P.C., it

CRM-M No.20053 of 2017 -4appears to be a fit case to exercise such powers. Accordingly, the petition is allowed and the abovesaid FIR alongwith ancillary proceedings are hereby quashed. ( H.S. Madaan ) 3.10.2018 Judge chugh Whether speaking / reasoned Yes / No Whether reportable Yes / No