Balwinder Singh And Others v. State Of Punjab And Others

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CRM-M-25550-2023 (O&M) Date of Decision : 11.09.2023 Balwinder Singh and Others ....Petitioners

VERSUS

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

Mr. Prince Sharma, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. H.S. Sidhu, AAG Punjab for respondent No.1. Mr. Kashmir Singh, Advocate for respondent Nos.2 to 5. -.- 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.71 dated 18.08.2019 registered under Sections 452/323/354/427/148/149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 at Police Station P.S. Valtoha, Tehsil Patti, District Tarn Taran, Punjab, and all subsequent proceedings arising out of the said FIR, on the basis of compromise dated 23.02.2023 (Annexure P-2). 2.

On 22.05.2023 the following order was passed :

- 2 - "By way of this petition, prayer is made to quash FIR No.71 dated 18.08.2019 registered at Police Station Valtoha, Tehsil Patti, District Tarn Taran under Sections 452, 323, 354, 427, 148, 149 of the IPC and all the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise dated 23.02.2023 (Annexure P-2).

Notice of motion.

Mr. Randeep Singh Khaira, DAG, Punjab, accepts notice on behalf of respondent No.1-State.

Mr. Shivam Kamboj, Advocate accepts notice on behalf of respondent Nos.2 to 5, filed his power of attorney and admits the factum of compromise. In view of the above, parties are directed to appear before learned Trial Court/Area Magistrate for making the statements regarding the compromise on or before 09.06.2023 or any other date which may be fixed by the trial Court for getting the statements recorded. Learned Magistrate shall report to this Court regarding the genuineness of the compromise; number of accused involved; the fact that all the aggrieved parties are party to the compromise, that no accused is absconding/P.O. Statement of Investigating Officer shall also be recorded by the said Magistrate to the effect that no other accused or aggrieved person is involved.

Adjourned to 11.09.2023."

- 3 - 3.

Pursuant to the order dated 22.05.2023, a report dated 12.07.2023 of the Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Patti 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 to 5 have no objection to the quashing of the present FIR. Statements of the parties have also been appended with the report.

4.

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

- 4 - 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. cannot be fittingly quashed even though the victim or victim's family and the offender have settled the dispute. 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.

- 5 - and prejudice and extreme injustice would be caused to him by not quashing the criminal case despite full and complete 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. 7.

Resultantly, FIR No.71 dated 18.08.2019 registered under Sections 452/323/354/427/148/149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 at Police

- 6 - Station P.S. Valtoha, Tehsil Patti, District Tarn Taran, Punjab is quashed, including all subsequent proceedings arising out of the said FIR, on the basis of compromise dated 23.02.2023 (Annexure P-2). 8.

The petition is accordingly allowed. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed off September 11, 2023 (ALKA SARIN) tripti JUDGE NOTE : Whether speaking/non-speaking : Speaking Whether reportable : YES/NO