Om Parkash @ Tittu & ORS v. State Of Punjab & ANR
!"#!$%&'(() (%*"$ *('('
+*"$ ,*"$)$ (!(* - )+.!/!+ (%*" *$0 +1*+($ 2345 5 6 Present : Mr. Jatinderpal Singh, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. K. S. Aulakh, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab. Mr. Ishan Gupta, Advocte for respondent No.2. The instant petition is for quashing of criminal complaint No.01/0004/2005, File No.44 dated 06.08.2005 titled "Rajni Bala Versus Om Parkash @ Tittu & others" filed under Sections 498A, 406, 504 and 506 read with Section 34 IPC and for setting aside of judgment and order of sentence dated 29.05.2013 passed by Sub< Divisional Magistrate, Budhlada and the consequent proceedings arising out of the same, on the basis of written compromise (Annexure P<3) arrived at between the parties. Report has been received from the appellate Court after statements of the parties was recorded regarding the compromise. The appellate Court has reported that the compromise is voluntary
and without any pressure or coercion. The appellate Court has also sent copy of the statements of parties. Learned counsel appearing for the complainant states that the complainant has no objection if the proceedings are quashed and the judgment and order of conviction and sentence are set aside. Hon'ble the Apex Court in 7'!+ '+8% ,$ (!(* - )+.!/"$ has held as under:< "
!" #
! $
$
%
&
$ '
'
(
!
$
%
)
! *
(
&
& (
(
(
+" &
$ (
%
,
(
!
%
$- .
-
.
$
+/&
$
%
%
%
( (
$
$ $
$
$
(
$
$
0(
%
(
*
$
%
(
!
(
1 In (!(* - 9!"+!(!#! : )+'$;! '
<== >< the Hon'ble Supreme Court has observed that the ends of justice are higher than ends of mere law, though justice has got to be administered according to the laws made by the legislature yet the Court proceeding ought not to be permitted to degenerate into a weapon of harassment or persecution.
The Larger Bench of this Court in the case of 9)?:'+1*" '+8%"$,$(!(* - )+.!/+" ="' '+!?
while discussing the scope of quashing of prosecution on the basis of compromise, by this Court in exercise of powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C., even in non<compoundable offence(s) has held that there is no statutory bar under the Cr.P.C. which can affect the inherent power of this Court under Section 482. Further, the same cannot be limited to matrimonial cases alone and the Court has the wide power to quash the proceedings even in non<compoundable offences notwithstanding the bar under Section 320 of the Cr.P.C., in order to prevent the abuse of law and to secure the ends of justice In the case of )/*'+8% +"(!(* - !"@!+! +" "? '$A > - 1*A'1*1 + <
a Division Bench of this Court while dealing with the question, as to whether the criminal proceedings can be quashed in exercise of powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. even after the accused was found guilty and convicted by the trial court and the matter is sub<judice before the appellate Court, answered the reference in the affirmative. Relying upon the decisions rendered in 9)?;'+1*"'+8% and 7'!+ '+8%(supra), the Court observed as under:< "/2
%
(
!3
$ $
4
!" 3
$
$
(
(
%
1 It has further been held that:
"!"
! 3
$
5 %
5
%
1 Adverting to the facts of present case, the parties have mutually settled their dispute and have buried the hatchet. There is nothing on record which is suggestive of the fact that the petitioners are pervious convicts or have committed any such offence during the pendency of trial/appeal.
Keeping in view the pronunciation of law and also the facts, in my opinion, it would be a fit case to exercise the powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
Therefore, the instant petition is allowed. Consequently, impugned FIR and all other consequent proceedings thereto, qua the petitioners are quashed. The judgment and order of sentence dated 29.05.2013 is also set aside.
(%!"A%