Gurpreet Kaur v. State Of Punjab & ANR
!"#$#%%&'"# (%)) *%#+,- .%#,", '% /("*0'12'* %# %,$ *3%*+,- 4 56
4 4
Present : Mr. Balbir Singh Jaswal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. K. S. Aulakh, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab. Mr. Ramesh Sharma, Advocate for respondent No.2. The trial of the petitioner in case FIR No.129 dated 05.06.2009, (Annexure P11) registered under Sections 4981A and 406 IPC, Police Station Beas, District Amritsar has culminated into his conviction under the aforesaid heads and he has been substantively sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year. He had challenged the order of conviction and sentence by way of an appeal before the Sessions Court, Amritsar. During the pendency thereof, it is claimed that the parties have entered into compromise with the intervention of respectable persons. Compromise1deed (Annexure P13) has been placed on record.
Report has been called from the Appellate Court, after statements of the parties was recorded regarding the compromise.
Additional Sessions Judge, Amritsar has reported that the compromise is voluntary and without any pressure or coercion. He 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 ., '% / ("*0'12#, +-has held as under:1 "
!" #
! $
$
%
&
$ '
'
(
!
$
%
)
! *
(
&
& (
(
(
+" &
$ (
%
,
(
!
%
$- .
-
.
$
+/&
$
%
%
%
( (
$
$ $
$
$
(
$
$
0(
%
(
*
$
%
(
!
(
1 In '% / &'#*''8' 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)*3%# )*72#,.,'% /("*0'12*# <+-+#);)*'>- 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 non1compoundable 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 non1compoundable 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 "1%)*72 *#'% /4'#?'
*'2 *# #> ),@ = / 3%@)3%3 * = = 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 sub1judice before the appellate Court, answered the reference in the affirmative. Relying upon the decisions rendered in &">:)*3%#)*7 and !)'
%
(
!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 petitioner is a pervious convict or she has 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 petitioner are quashed. The judgment and order of conviction and sentence are also set aside.