Basau Ram And ORS v. State Of Punjab And Others

-1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

Date of Decision: 14.11.2022 Basau Ram and others .... Petitioners

Versus

State of Punjab and others .... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR VERMA Present: - Mr. Lalit Singla, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. G.S. Sandhu, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab. Ms. Varsha Sharma, Advocate for respondents No. 2 and 3. ASHOK KUMAR VERMA, J. (ORAL) The petitioners have filed the present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C., for quashing FIR No. 82 dated 07.11.2015 (Annexure P-1) registered under Sections 342, 323, 506, 148 and 149 IPC at Police Station Khanauri, District Sangrur and all the consequential proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise (Annexure P-2). Pursuant to the order dated 29.09.2022, passed by this Court, the parties appeared before the learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Moonak, to get their statements recorded. Learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Moonak, has submitted her report along with statements of the parties vide letter No. 599 dated 20.100.2022 duly forwarded by the learned District and Sessions Judge, Sangrur, vide Endst. No. 8423/EB dated 21.10.2022.

-2I have heard learned Counsel for the petitioners, learned State Counsel, learned counsel for respondents No. 2 and 3 and gone through the relevant record.

It is now well settled that the High Court has inherent power to quash the criminal proceedings in non-compoundable cases on the basis of settlement between the parties for securing the ends of justice or to prevent abuse of the process where the possibility of conviction is remote and bleak and continuation of the criminal case would put the accused to great oppression and prejudice and extreme injustice would be caused to him by not quashing the criminal case. Criminal cases having overwhelmingly and predominantly civil character particularly those arising out of commercial transaction or arising out of matrimonial relationship or family dispute can be quashed when the parties have resolved their entire dispute among themselves.

However, such power cannot be exercised in those prosecutions which involve heinous and serious offences of mental depravity or offences like murder, rape dacoity, etc. which are not private in nature and have a serious impact on society. Similarly, prosecution for offences alleged to have been committed under special enactments like the Prevention of Corruption Act or the offences committed by public servant while working in that capacity cannot be quashed on the basis of compromise between the victim and the offender. For judicial precedents in this regard, reference may be made to Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab and anr., 2012 (4) RAJ 549: Narinder Singh Vs. State of Punjab (Supreme Court) : 2014 (2) RCR (Criminal) 482, State of Madhya Pradesh Vs.

-3others (Supreme Court) : 2019 (2) RCR (Criminal) 255 and Kulwinder Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab and others (Punjab and Haryana High Court) : 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052.

According to the report, learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Moonak, is satisfied that the compromise is genuine and has been effected between the parties without any pressure and with their free will and without any coercion or undue influence. Considering the report of learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Moonak and the fact that the compromise will bring peace and harmony between the parties, aforesaid FIR No. 82 dated 07.11.2015 (Annexure P-1) and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom, are quashed, qua petitioners, only.

Disposed of, accordingly.

November 14, 2022 (ASHOK KUMAR VERMA) rishu JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No