Sukhdev Singh Alias Sunny And Others v. State Of Punjab And Others

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH Date of Decision : 12.09.2023 Sukhdev Singh @ Sunny and Others ....Petitioners

VERSUS

State of Punjab and Others ....Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ALKA SARIN Present :

Mr. Naveen Bawa, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. H.S.Sidhu, AAG Punjab for respondent No.1. Mr. Vishnu Dutt, Advocate for respondent Nos.2 and 3. -.- ALKA SARIN, J. (Oral) 1.

The present petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for quashing of FIR No.0148 dated 07.08.2019 registered under Sections 294, 354-B, 427, 148, 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (offences under Sections 148, 149 IPC were deleted and offences under Sections 201, 34 IPC were added later on) at Police Station Dakha, District Ludhiana, and all subsequent proceedings arising out of the said FIR, on the basis of compromise dated 29.03.2023 (Annexure P-2).

2.

On 24.04.2023 the following order was passed :

-2- "This is a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of FIR No.0148 dated 07.08.2019, under Sections 294, 354-B, 427, 148, 149 of IPC, 1860 (offences under Sections 148, 149 of IPC, 1860 were deleted and offences under Sections 201, 34 of IPC, 1860 were added later on), registered at Police Station Dakha, District Ludhiana (Annexure P-1) and all subsequent proceedings arising thereto on the basis of compromise deed dated 29.03.2023 (Annexure P-2).

Notice of motion.

Mr. Jashandeep Singh, AAG, Punjab, accepts notice on behalf of respondent-State and Mr. Vishnu Dutt, Advocate has put in appearance on behalf of respondents No.2 & 3 by filing memo of appearance. Let the parties appear before the trial Court/Duty Magistrate on 12.05.2023 or any other date convenient to the Court, for recording their statements with regard to compromise.

The trial Court/Duty Magistrate is directed to submit a report on or before the next date of hearing as regards authenticity and genuineness of compromise after recording statements of all the parties. The trial

-3Court/Duty Magistrate shall also furnish the following information:

1. Whether there is any other accused, apart from the petitioners arrayed in this petition.

2. Whether there is any other complainant or affected/aggrieved party, apart from the respondents arrayed in the petition.

3. Whether the parties are involved in any other criminal case.

4. Whether any of the parties has been declared a proclaimed offender.

The trial Court/Duty Magistrate shall send his/her report through the Sessions Judge concerned on or before the date fixed, i.e.12.09.2023.."

3.

Pursuant to the order dated 24.04.2023, a report dated 06.09.2023 of the Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Ludhiana has been received by this Court wherein it has been stated that the statements of the parties have been recorded and the parties have stated that they have compromised the matter voluntarily without any threat, pressure, undue influence or fraud and that the respondent Nos.2 and 3 have no objection to the quashing of the present FIR. Statements of the parties have also been appended with the report.

-44.

The Apex Court in the case of Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab & Anr. [2012 (10) SCC 303] has held as under : "57. The position that emerges from the above discussion can be summarised thus: the power of the High Court in quashing a criminal proceeding or FIR or complaint in exercise of its inherent jurisdiction is distinct and different from the power given to a criminal court for compounding the offences under Section 320 of the Code. Inherent power is of wide plenitude with no statutory limitation but it has to be exercised in accord with the guideline engrafted in such power viz; (i) to secure the ends of justice or (ii) to prevent abuse of the process of any Court. In what cases power to quash the criminal proceeding or complaint or F.I.

R may be exercised where the offender and victim have settled their dispute would depend on the facts and circumstances of each case and no category can be prescribed. However, before exercise of such power, the High Court must have due regard to the nature and gravity of the crime. Heinous and serious offences of mental depravity or offences like murder, rape, dacoity, etc.

-5dispute. Such offences are not private in nature and have serious impact on society. Similarly, any compromise between the victim and offender in relation to the offences under special statutes like Prevention of Corruption Act or the offences committed by public servants while working in that capacity etc; cannot provide for any basis for quashing criminal proceedings involving such offences. But the criminal cases having overwhelmingly and pre-dominatingly civil flavour stand on different footing for the purposes of quashing, particularly the offences arising from commercial, financial, mercantile, civil, partnership or such like transactions or the offences arising out of matrimony relating to dowry, etc.

or the family disputes where the wrong is basically private or personal in nature and the parties have resolved their entire dispute.

-6complete settlement and compromise with the victim. In other words, the High Court must consider whether it would be unfair or contrary to the interest of justice to continue with the criminal proceeding or continuation of the criminal proceeding would tantamount to abuse of process of law despite settlement and compromise between the victim and wrongdoer and whether to secure the ends of justice, it is appropriate that criminal case is put to an end and if the answer to the above question(s) is in affirmative, the High Court shall be well within its jurisdiction to quash the criminal proceeding."

5.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has also referred to the law laid down by this Court in Kulwinder Singh & Ors. vs. State of Punjab & Anr. [2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052] wherein it has been held that even in non-compoundable offences, if the parties have entered into a compromise, this Court has wide powers under Section 482 CrPC to quash the proceedings to prevent abuse of law and secure the ends of justice. 6.

In view of the above and keeping in view the report by the Trial Court that the parties have genuinely entered into a compromise and all the disputes between the parties have been resolved, it would not be in the interest of justice to continue the criminal proceedings.

-77.

Resultantly, FIR No.0148 dated 07.08.2019 registered under Sections 294, 354-B, 427, 148, 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (offences under Sections 148, 149 IPC were deleted and offences under Sections 201, 34 IPC were added later on) at Police Station Dakha, District Ludhiana is quashed, including all subsequent proceedings arising out of the said FIR, on the basis of compromise dated 29.03.2023 (Annexure P-2). 8.

The petition is accordingly allowed. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed off.

September 12, 2023 (ALKA SARIN) tripti JUDGE NOTE : Whether speaking/non-speaking : Speaking Whether reportable : YES/NO