Robin Khurana v. State Of Punjab And Others

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH Date of Decision : 31.08.2023 Robin Khurana ....Petitioner

VERSUS

State of Punjab & Others.

....Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ALKA SARIN Present :

Mr. Ishant Khangwal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. H.S. Sidhu, AAG Punjab for respondent No.1. Ms. Harshita, 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.85 dated 09.07.2021 registered under Sections 406, 498-A, 323, 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 at Police Station Phase-11, Mohali, and all subsequent proceedings arising out of the said FIR, on the basis of compromise dated 04.08.2021 (Annexure P-2).

2.

On 18.04.2023 the following order was passed : "Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that on account child of the parties being unwell, they could not appear before the trial Court on 28.02.2023 for recording of their statements in terms of the order passed

-2by this Court, dated 10.09.2021 and requests that one last opportunity to get the statements recorded may be granted to the parties.

The prayer is accepted.

Parties are afforded one last opportunity to appear before the trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate for recording of their statements in terms of the order passed by this Court, dated 10.09.2021, by moving an appropriate application before the trial Court, who shall submit its report before this Court, on or before the next date of hearing i.e. 31.08.2023."

3.

Pursuant to the order dated 18.04.2023, a report dated 29.07.2023 of the Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, SAS Nagar Mohali 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 No.2 and 3 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

-3High 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. 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.

-4Corruption 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.

In this category of cases, High Court may quash criminal proceedings if in its view, because of the compromise between the offender and victim, the possibility of conviction is remote and bleak and continuation of criminal case would put accused to great oppression 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.

-5the 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.85 dated 09.07.2021 registered under Sections 406, 498-A, 323, 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 at Police Station Phase-11, Mohali is quashed including all subsequent proceedings arising out of the said FIR on the basis of compromise dated 04.08.2021 (Annexure P-2).

-68.

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

August 31, 2023 (ALKA SARIN) tripti JUDGE NOTE : Whether speaking/non-speaking : Speaking Whether reportable : YES/NO