Ram Avtar And Another v. State Of Ut Chandigarh And ORS

-1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 29.09.2022 Ram Avtar and another .... Petitioners

Versus

State of U.T., Chandigarh and others .... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR VERMA Present: - Mr. Davinder Lubana, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr. Sumit Jain, APP, U.T., Chandigarh.

Mr. Surinder Singh, Advocate, for respondents No.2 and 3. ASHOK KUMAR VERMA, J. (ORAL) The petitioners have filed the present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C., for quashing FIR No.127 dated 09.03.2015, registered under Sections 452, 341, 323, 506, 34 IPC at Police Station Manimajra, U.T., Chandigarh, on the basis of compromise (Annexure P-2) arrived at between the parties.

Pursuant to the order dated 09.04.2021 passed by a coordinate Bench of this Court, the parties appeared before the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Chandigarh, to get their statements recorded. Learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Chandigarh, has submitted his report along with statements of the parties vide letter No.203 dated 06.07.2021 duly forwarded by the District and Sessions Judge, Chandigarh, vide Endst. No.DSJ-EC-2021/4208 dated 06.07.2021. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned

-2counsel for U.T., Chandigarh and learned counsel for respondents No.2 and 3 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 Narinder Singh Vs. State of Punjab (Supreme Court) : 2014 (2) RCR (Criminal) 482, State of Madhya Pradesh Vs.

-3and 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, Chandigarh, is satisfied that the compromise effected between the parties is complete, genuine, valid and good in the eyes of law. Considering the report of learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Chandigarh dated 06.07.2021 and the fact that the compromise will bring peace and harmony between the parties, aforesaid FIR No.127 dated 09.03.2015 and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom, are quashed, qua the petitioners only.

Disposed of, accordingly.

September 29, 2022 (ASHOK KUMAR VERMA) R.S.

JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No