Ajay Verma v. State Of Punjab And Others
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-34486-2021 (O&M) Date of order: 28.08.2023 Ajay Verma @ Aman .....Petitioner(s) Vs.
State of Punjab & Others .....Respondent(s)
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA Present:- Mr. Brijeshwar Singh Bhalla, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Aditya Kapoor, AAG Punjab.
Mr. S.P. Singh, Advocate for respondents No.2 and 3.
***** Nidhi Gupta, J.
The prayer in this petition is for quashing of FIR No.266 dated 23.11.2019 (Annexure P-1) under Sections 363, 366-A, 376 IPC; Sections 3, 4 and 6 of POCSO Act and Sections 3 and 4 of SC & ST Act registered at Police Station City Moga, District Moga and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise/affidavits dated 17.08.2021 (Annexure P2 and P3).
Vide order dated 28.09.2021 this Court had directed the parties to appear before Illaqa Magistrate for getting their statements recorded in terms of certain parameters given in the aforesaid order dated 28.09.2021 with regard to the compromise/affidavits dated 17.08.2021 (Annexure P2 and P3).
In terms of the order dated 28.09.2021 passed by this Court parties have appeared before the Court of Mr. Vikrant Kumar, Additional District and Sessions Judge, Fast Tract Special Court, Moga and as per his report dated 08.01.2022 submitted to this Court, both the parties have got recorded their respective statements in Court. A perusal of the above said report would show that the parties have appeared and suffered statements with respect to the compromise, which have been found to be voluntary, genuine, and out of free will.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that the petitioner was not declared proclaimed offender in the present case.
Learned State Counsel on instructions from ASI Sukhwinder Singh submits that the petitioner and respondent No.3/victim are now married and they are blessed with a child. Learned State Counsel further states that he has no objection in case the FIR is quashed on the basis of compromise qua the petitioner.
Learned counsel for respondents No.2 & 3 has again reiterated that the matter has been settled and the said compromise is in the interest of all the persons and would help in bringing out peace and amity between the two parties.
This Court has heard the learned counsel for the parties and has perused the file.
After perusing the report submitted by the Illaqa Magistrate, this Court finds that the matter has been amicably settled
between the parties. Since the matter has been settled and the parties have decided to live in peace, this Court feels that in order to secure the ends of justice, the criminal proceedings deserve to be quashed. As per the Full Bench judgment of this Court in "Kulwinder Singh and others Vs State of Punjab", 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052, it is held that High Court has power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to allow the compounding of non-compoundable offence and quash the proceedings where the High Court is of the opinion that the same is required to prevent the abuse of the process of law or otherwise to secure the ends of justice. This power of quashing is not confined to matrimonial disputes alone.
Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of "Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab and another", 2012 (4) RCR (Criminal) 543, had also observed that in order to secure the ends of justice or to prevent the abuse of process of Court, inherent power can be used by this Court to quash criminal proceedings in which a compromise has been effected. The relevant portion of para 57 of the said judgment is reproduced hereinbelow:- "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 view of what has been discussed hereinabove, this petition is allowed and FIR No.266 dated 23.11.2019 (Annexure P-1) under Sections 363, 366-A, 376 IPC; Sections 3, 4 and 6 of POCSO Act and Sections 3 and 4 of SC & ST Act registered at Police Station City Moga, District Moga along with all other consequential proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise, are ordered to be quashed qua the petitioner. Petition stands disposed of.
Pending application(s) if any also stand(s) disposed of. 28.08.2023 (Nidhi Gupta) Sunena Judge Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No