Balraj Singh v. State Of Punjab And Another

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 02.06.2023 Balraj Singh ....Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab and another

...Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSH BUNGER Present :

Mr. Amardeep Singh, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Harjinder S. Sidhu, AAG, Punjab.

Ms. Kirandeep Kaur, Advocate for respondent No.2.

HARSH BUNGER, J. (Oral) This petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of FIR No.102 dated 25.09.2021 (Annexure P-2), under Sections 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, registered at Police Station Verowal, District Tarn Taran and all the consequential proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise deed dated 17.09.2022 (Annexure P-3) arrived at between the parties. 2.

Vide order dated 12.05.2023 passed by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, the Illaqa Magistrate/trial Court was directed to record the statements of the parties with regard to the genuineness and validity of the compromise.

3.

In compliance thereof, the Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Khadur Sahib has submitted a consolidated report vide letter dated 26.05.2023 which indicates that the parties appeared before the Sub

Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Khadur Sahib and got recorded their respective statements with regard to the validity of the compromise. As per the report, the compromise arrived at between the parties is genuine and with free will and consent. Relevant extract of the said report is reproduced as under:- "1.

That there is no any other accused other than the petitioner arrayed in this petition.

2.

That no person is declared as Proclaimed Offender in this FIR.

3.

That the compromise drawn amongst the parties concerned, covers all the concerned in the penal transaction concerned and the same is genuine, voluntarily, without any coercion or undue influence with their free will 4.

That no persons are involved in any other FIR." 4.

A perusal of the said report shows that statements of the concerned persons have been recorded in the case, who have stated that the matter has been compromised and the complainant has further endorsed his no objection in case the FIR in question is quashed. They have further stated that the compromise arrived at between them is genuine, voluntary and without any pressure.

5.

Learned counsel for respondent No.2 has again reiterated that the matter has been settled and the said compromise is in the interest of all the concerned persons and would help in bringing out peace and amity between the parties.

6.

Learned State counsel does not raise any serious dispute regarding quashing of aforesaid FIR in question. 7.

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have perused the file.

8.

In the light of judgments rendered by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the cases of Shakuntala Sawhney Vs. Kaushalya Sawhney, (1979) 3 SCR 639, Gian Singh Versus State of Punjab and another. 2012(4) RCR (Criminal) 543 and considering the entire facts, compromise, the statements of the parties recorded before the Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Khadur Sahib, and also the report dated 26.05.2023 submitted by the Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Khadur Sahib, since the parties have arrived at a compromise by amicably settling their disputes and have decided to live in peace, no useful purpose will be served in allowing the criminal proceedings to continue.

9.

Further, in the light of the above mentioned judicial precedents, when the parties have entered into a compromise, then continuation of the proceedings would be mere an abuse of process of the Court. 10.

In order to prevent unnecessary continuation of criminal proceedings on the ground that there are bleak chances of conviction in the case, I am of the considered view that it would be in fitness of things to quash the FIR on the basis of compromise and by quashing the FIR while accepting the prayer of the petitioner, would be securing the ends of justice. 11.

Accordingly, this petition is allowed. FIR No.102 dated 25.09.2021 (Annexure P-2), under Sections 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, registered at Police Station Verowal, District Tarn Taran and all the consequential proceedings arising therefrom, are quashed. However, the same would be subject to payment of costs of Rs.10,000/- to be deposited by the petitioner with the "Poor Patients Welfare Fund, PGIMER, Chandigarh" and the said amount would be spent for the treatment of poor patients within the knowledge of its Medical Superintendent.

12.

Needless to say that parties shall remain bound by the terms of compromise and their statements made in the Court below. 13.

All pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of. 02.06.2023 (HARSH BUNGER) Himani JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether reportable:

Yes/No