Sharnjeet Singh v. State Of Punjab And Another

-1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 29.09.2022 Sharnjeet Singh .... Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab and another .... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR VERMA Present: - Mr. G.S. Hayer, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Amish Sharma, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab. Mr. S.K. Saini, Advocate, for respondent No.2. ASHOK KUMAR VERMA, J. (ORAL) The petitioner has filed the present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C., for quashing FIR No.0077 dated 02.10.2019, registered under Sections 499, 500 IPC and Section 67(A) of the Information Technology Act, 2000 at Police Station Bariwala, Sri Muktsar Sahib, and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise dated 29.03.2022 (Annexure P-2) arrived at between the parties. Pursuant to the order dated 08.04.

2022 passed by a coordinate Bench of this Court, the parties appeared before the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Sri Muktsar Sahib, to get their statements recorded. Learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Sri Muktsar Sahib, has submitted his report along with statements of the parties vide letter No.944 dated 30.04.2022 duly forwarded by the District and Sessions Judge, Sri Muktsar Sahib, vide letter No.864/EB dated 05.05.2022.

-2I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned State counsel and 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 Narinder Singh Vs. State of Punjab (Supreme Court) : 2014 (2) RCR (Criminal) 482, State of Madhya Pradesh Vs.

-3Narayan 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, Sri Muktsar Sahib, is satisfied that the compromise effected between the parties is genuine, voluntary and without any kind of undue influence or pressure.

Considering the report of learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Sri Muktsar Sahib, dated 30.04.2022 and the fact that the compromise will bring peace and harmony between the parties, aforesaid FIR No.0077 dated 02.10.2019 and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom, are quashed, qua the petitioner only. Disposed of, accordingly.

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

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