Sukhwant Singh v. The State Of Punjab And Others




   
  

 !"

!

SUKHWANT SINGH     # 
 STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS

$   %   &'%  (
)
 (  * 








 

 
 
!
 " 



# 
 



  

$%

&
'''''
)
 (  *  + #,- (
)*
# 



"

+
  


&,%


+

+# 
  
(-./
 


  


1++23
4 

4 5



67
$%,
 
(/8/%8(9
  


/,8
 
9((


7 
 
+ 
(,:8
0  


  


17+23
 

 



"



;



#



0

<
=(3
 


5





#




## >



 %88&%8(,
0

<
=%
>

<
=/3

 



%

 



 


  

-2- + @75




 
 
8:8%%8%8


+ 




#

  
 

##
 
 



 

 
  

/




 
 
  
#


; 
A 


 
"



 #
$
&/
 8-8/%8%8
?

  

< 

 
  
   =

Statement of ASI Davinder Singh was also recorded separately to the effect that there is only one accused namely Sukhwant Singh son of Surta Singh, in FIR no.28 dated 13.03.2015. U/s 380, 511 IPC in PS Raja Sansi and he has not been declared as proclaimed offender till date and there is one complainant Dheer Singh son of Kaka Singh and two eye witnesses namely Jaswant Singh son of Hazara Singh and Jodha Singh son of Kashmir Singh in the aforesaid FIR. From the perusal of statement of parties, it transpires that the matter has been compromised with the free and voluntary consent of the complainant Dheer Singh and two eye witnesses namely Jaswant Singh. Jodha Singh and the accused person namely Sukhwant Singh. Furthermore, as per statement of ASI Davinder Singh, there is only oneaccused person namely Sukhwant Singh in present FIR and he has not been declared as P.O till date and there is one complainant namely Dheer Singh and two eye witnesses namely Jaswant Singh and Jodha Singh. &

B  
 



 

#


##
#


 
 *

 "

 

 
#

 9



# 
 
 
    

$
%

&
 
  

 #



67
 


5



 
5



:


6
)

+

#









    

   
  


-3-    

 

!

""

 #

$%

 
  



       

          

 ! 

"  #$## 

 

  



   



 ! 

 ## %    

   % %     & %# ' (  & '

(

  '

& '

 

  ) '* )

  *  ( +#    ,,

    

 

,  ,    

-
   &  

     

       

 

# ./ 

 

,

& 

   &   &   

 ,# (

        

   

     

      

    , 

                 

    

        

 



0 

, 

   

& # .12 ,

   ! 

./'  #$##     ,   



 ! 

" #$## . 

,  , ,  

 3

 ,

      # (     &  

 ! 

" #$##     

   

,  ,       



 ,   

  

-4- %   & %#4      ,,

 



 5  ,

,,    

   ,           

 

  ! 

" #$##   

,  ,  

     

  ,    #                    

  

    

   

,



          

  &  , 

   

 

  

 

# .. 

   



  ,     



  #$##

       

      ! 

 "# 6  ,

  ,  ,,

 

   

   3  



   

,

 





  

     ! 

 ./   #$##           & # ." 

  ! 

 "   #$##       7 54+     



 #        

    5,       )     0      

#(



 

      ,

   # 

   ! 

" #$##

,#)

)



      

    ,    



#     

     

 , 

    #           5    ,  ,   



 #  



  , ,



  

 ,

 5 

  

#8



   

,  ,

-5-    



         ,,    ,   

           

      , 

 

,  ,      

,



 

 

  ,  # .


 





 
5




"#

 
 
 
*

C D 
 #
+

#

'Gian Singh Versus State of Punjab and another,(2012)10 SCC303'. Still further, the broad principles for exercising the powers under Section 482 were summarized by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of 'Parbatbhai Aahir @ Parbatbhai Bhimsinhbhai Karmur and others versus State of Gujarat and another" (2017) 9 SCC 641'. 8.



 


#  
 

#

 






 
*

 
?





 4 *





" 
#



  




-


C D 
 #
+ 


#


 D"# + , , -

&    *

$



)

.!/0

#



E 

  






#






 "


<   #


  *

##


 

5






 
 

+ 5

67

 


 #

 

#




C D 
 #
+
< 


   =

-619. We thus sum-up and hold that as opposed to Section 320 Cr.P.C. where the Court is squarely guided by the compromise between the parties in respect of offences 'compoundable' within the statutory framework, the extraordinary power enjoined upon a High Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. or vested in this Court under Article 142 of the Constitution, can be invoked beyond the metes and bounds of Section 320 Cr.P.C. Nonetheless, we reiterate that such powers of wide amplitude ought to be exercised carefully in the context of quashing criminal proceedings, bearing in mind: (i) Nature and effect of the offence on the conscious of the society; (ii) Seriousness of the injury, if any; (iii) Voluntary nature of compromise between the accused and the victim; & (iv) Conduct of the accused persons, prior to and after the occurrence of the purported offence and/or other relevant considerations.

(8

?

 
  


# 
#
  



 


5

  #

 #






   


&,%
++ =
3

 
  



  *
 #




 


3


 

#

>


4 *


 


 #  

 
3

 

9&
* 



# 


  
  









 

 



4
 

-7- 3

67

 

 

* 
%8(9



 




  
 


  
* 

v)

5










4

*

 
 
7


# 


4

+ vi)
+


 

  
 # 

4 *
 =


 *

 

vii)


4 *

  *



 



3
$
 
 



 
*

 F
ix)




 *
# 





 
 *


#



 

*






 



67 x)
#

4 *





+


4 *





" 
# 
?

 "



 
 


 




 
 

*

= <



 # * 11.

In view of the report of the 
; 
A 


 
"



a






*

 <
+ 1



-'

     $

$

 !!

 

-8-
"# + , , -

&   

$



)

.!/
 
 
*

6
)

+





   -'

   *

 !

""

 #

$%


 
?

  FIR No.28 dated 13.03.2015 under Sections 380 and 511 of the IPC registered at Police Station Raja Sansi, District Amritsar Rural (Annexure P-1) and all other consequential proceedings arising therefrom
#.#/012. 5

 

 
 ##
>



dated 20.04.2018 (Annexure P-2 and Annexure P-3) However, the same would be subject to payment of costs of Rs.10,000/- to be deposited by the petitioner with the "High Court Bar Association Environment Protection Fund", within one month from receipt of certified copy of this order. 
   +)
 (  *-
' 3 !

    9 !,





G

 4 @  H @$






G


   





H @$