Vikram v. State Of Haryana And Another

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH **** Date of decision:31.08.2022 Vikram ... Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana and another ... Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKAS BAHL

Present:

Mr. Amit Kumar, Advocate for Mr. G.S. Sandhu, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Dhruv Sihag, AAG, Haryana.

Mr. Dinesh Maurya, Advocate for respondent No.2. VIKAS BAHL, J.(ORAL) This is a petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of FIR No.0006 dated 19.05.2022 registered under Sections 43, 66, 66(C) of IT Act, 2000 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 at Cyber Crime Police Station Karnal Range, District Karnal (Annexure P-1) and subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise. On 01.08.2022, this Court was pleased to pass the following order:- "This is a petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of FIR No.0006 dated 19.05.2022 registered under Sections 43, 66, 66(C) and 420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 at Cyber Crime Police Station Karnal Range, District Karnal (Annexure P-1) and subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise.

Notice of motion for 31.08.2022.

On asking of the Court, Mr. Sarabjit S. Cheema, AAG, Punjab appears and accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State and Mr. Dinesh Maurya, Advocate appears on behalf of respondent No.2.

The parties are directed to appear before the Illaqa Magistrate/trial Court for recording their statements qua compromise within a period of 15 days.

The Illaqa Magistrate/trial Court is directed to submit a report on or before the next date of hearing containing the following information:- 1.

Number of persons arrayed as accused.

2.

Whether any accused is proclaimed offender?

3.

Whether the compromise is genuine, voluntary and without any coercion or undue influence?

4.

Whether the accused persons are involved in any other FIR or not?

5.

The trial Court is also directed to record the statement of the Investigating Officer as to how many victims/complainants are there in the FIR.

(VIKAS BAHL) 01.08.2022 JUDGE"

In pursuance to the said order, a report has been submitted by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Karnal. The relevant portion of the said report is reproduced hereinbelow:- "The point wise information sought by Hon'ble High Court vide its order dated 01.08.2022 is as under: - (a) Only one person namely Vikram is arrayed as accused. (b) No accused has been declared as proclaimed offender in the present FIR.

(c) Compromise seems to be genuine, voluntary and without any coercion or undue influence.

(d) Accused is not involved in any other FIR.

(e) Statement of Investigating Officer has been recorded. There is only one victim/complainant in this FIR. The requisite report is being submitted for your kind perusal as desired.

(Isha Khatri), Chief Judicial Magistrate, Karnal UID No.HR-0261 10.08.2022"

A perusal of the above said report would show that the petitioner & respondent No.2 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 has stated that he has no objection in case the FIR is quashed on the basis of compromise qua the petitioner. 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 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 trial Court, this Court finds that the matter has been amicably settled between the petitioner and the complainant. 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 prosecution 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 the 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.0006 dated 19.05.2022 registered under Sections 43, 66, 66(C) of Information Technology Act, 2000 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 at Cyber Crime Police Station Karnal Range, District Karnal (Annexure P-1) and all the subsequent proceedings emanating therefrom are ordered to be quashed, qua the petitioner.

(VIKAS BAHL) August 31, 2022 JUDGE Ishwar Singh Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No