Gurjinder Singh And ORS v. State Of Punjab And ANR

CRM-M No. 25145 of 2018 -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M No. 25145 of 2018 (O&M) Date of decision : 31.7.2018 ...

Gurjinder Singh and others ................Petitioners vs.

State of Punjab and another .................Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice H. S. Madaan Present: Mr.Satish Sabharwal, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Rakeshinder Singh Sidhu, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab.

Mr. P.S. Miglani, Advocate for respondent No.2. ...

H. S. Madaan, J. (Oral) Petitioners - Gurjinder Singh and others have brought the instant petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of FIR No. 222 dated 13.8.2017, for offences under Sections 326-B, 323, 506, 149 IPC, (Sections 498-A, 406 IPC added later on)registered at Police Station Sadar, Ferozepur, District Ferozepur, against them, alongwith consequential proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis

CRM-M No. 25145 of 2018 -2of compromise, stated to have been effected between them and complainant Nishu - arrayed as respondent No.2. When the petition came up for hearing on 5.6.2018, notice of motion was ordered to be issued. The respondent No. 1 - State of Punjab through State counsel, whereas respondent No.2 through Mr. P.S. Miglani, 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 Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ferozepur, in terms of which complainant Nishu and accused, namely,Gurjinder Singh, Balwinder Kaur, Sukhwinder Kaur @ Sonia, Surinderpal Singh and Kashmir Singh, 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. There is nothing on record to doubt the genuineness of the compromise so arrived at between the parties. Alongwith the report copies of statements of the complainant and all the accused, have been annexed.

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned State counsel, besides going through the record. It is stated that the FIR is at the stage of investigation.

CRM-M No. 25145 of 2018 -3This is a matrimonial dispute, which has been amicably settled and now the complainant is residing with her husband Gurjinder Singh in her matrimonial home.

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. 25145 of 2018 -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 ) 31.7.2018 Judge chugh Whether speaking / reasoned Yes / No Whether reportable Yes / No