Surinder Kaur Sodhi v. State Of Punjab And Another

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 29.01.2025 SURINDER KAUR SODHI ....Petitioner(s)

VERSUS

STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER ....Respondent(s) CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH

Present:

Mr. Manuj Nagrath, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Jasdeep Singh, DAG, Punjab.

Mr. Sahil Thakur, Advocate for respondent No.2. **** SANJAY VASHISTH , J. (Oral) CRM-1412 & 1413-2025 i) Prayer in the present application(s) is for impleading the applicant as petitioner No.2 and for placing on record the amended memo of parties. ii) Learned counsel for the applicant-petitioner states that the statements of petitioner and respondent No.2 have already been recorded, confirming the genuineness of the compromise, wherein complainant/respondent No.2 stated that he has already entered into compromise with petitioner-Surinder Kumar Sodi and other co-accused namely Jashanpreet Singh Sodhi. iii) However, it is clarified that in normal course no such prayer i.e. for addition of the petitioner(s) in the already pending quashing petition are allowed but, here is a situation where the sole victim who is complainant also has already given statement before the trial Court that he has compromised the matter with the accused persons, and report of learned Magistrate qua genuineness of compromise has also been received by this Court.

It is also stated in the statement that there are only two accused, one is the petitioner Surinder Kumar Sodhi and other namely; Jashanpreet Singh Sodhi. Applicant-Jashanpreet Singh Sodhi; prayed for his impleadment as petitioner No.2 so that the proceedings can be quashed in its entirety qua him also.

Considering the averments made in the application and the circumstances, which are noticed hereabove, prayer made in the application(s) is allowed. Applicant Jashanpreet Singh Sodhi s/o Jagpreet Kaur Sodhi is hereby ordered to be impleaded as petitioner No.2. Amended Memo of parties is taken on record. Registry is directed to tag the same at appropriate place with the paper-book.

Both the applications stands disposed of.

Main case 1.

The present petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., has been filed by the petitioner, for quashing of FIR No. 102, dated 27.03.2020 (Annexure P-1), for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 120-B of IPC and Section 24 of Immigration Act, registered at Police Station Division No.5 Ludhiana, and all the consequential proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise deed dated 29.02.2023 (Annexure P-2).

2.

Vide order dated 11.03.2024, the affected parties were directed to appear before the learned trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate, for getting their respective statements recorded with regard to the compromise. The trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate was to submit a report in this regard giving certain details as enumerated in the said order.

3.

Pursuant to the order dated 11.03.2024, passed by this Court, the parties have appeared before learned Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ludhiana, and as per report dated 20.04.2024, submitted to this Court, both the parties have got recorded their respective statements in Court. The operative part of the report received from learned Court below is as under:- "It is further respectfully submitted that in view of the statements of complainant/respondent no.2 Manjeet Kaur and accused/petitioner Surinder Kaur Sodhi, it emerges on record that the matter has been compromised between them with the intervention of respectables out of their free will, voluntarily and without any pressure, threat, undue influence or coercion from any quarter and complainant has no objection in case the FIR and subsequent proceedings are quashed against accused.

From the statements aforementioned, it further emerges on record that present FIR was registered against two accused persons namely Surinder Kaur Sodhi and Jashanpreet Singh Sodhi, but the challan/report under Section 173(2) Cr.PC has been presented against accused Surinder Kaur Sodhi only and accused Jashanpreet Singh Sodhi son of Jagpreet Singh Sodhi has been kept in column no.2 of the challan/report under Section 173(2) Cr.PC, as he could not be arrested in this case." 4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner urged that due to intervention of the respectable and elderly people of the society, the matter has been resolved and private parties have effected a compromise dated 29.02.2023 (Annexure P-2). At present, there remains no dispute amongst the private parties. He further submits that in view of the compromise so effected between the private parties, pendency of the impugned FIR and consequential proceedings emanating therefrom would be sheer abuse of the process of law.

5.

Learned State counsel as also learned counsel for respondent No.2, after going through the statements and the report received from learned Court below, very fairly admit that the private parties have resolved their dispute and effected a compromise and that they have no objection if the impugned FIR and all the consequential proceedings are quashed on the basis of the compromise. 6.

The Full Bench of this Court in the matter of Kulwinder Singh and others v. State of Punjab and another, 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052, has observed as under:

"(28) To conclude, it can safely be said that there can never be any hard and fast category which can be prescribed to enable the Court to exercise its power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. The only principle that can be laid down is the one which has been incorporated in the Section itself, i.e., "to prevent abuse of the process of any Court" or "to secure the ends of justice". (29) In Mrs. Shakuntala Sawhney v. Mrs. Kaushalya Sawhney and others, Hon'ble Krishna Iyer, J. aptly summoned up the essence of compromise in the following words: "The finest hour of justice arrives propitiously when parties, despite falling apart, bury the hatchet and weave a sense of fellowship of reunion."

(30) The power to do complete justice is the very essence of every judicial justice dispensation system. It cannot be diluted by distorted perceptions and is not a slave to anything, except to the caution and circumspection, the standards of which the Court sets before it, in exercise of such plenary and unfettered power inherently vested in it while donning the cloak of compassion to achieve the ends of justice.

(31) No embargo, be in the shape of Section 320(9) of the Cr.P.C., or any other such curtailment, can whittle down the power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C.

(32) The compromise, in a modern society, is the sine qua non of harmony and orderly behaviour. It is the soul of justice and if the power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. is used to enhance such a compromise which, in turn, enhances the social amity and reduces friction, then it truly is "finest hour of justice". Disputes which have their genesis in a matrimonial discord, landlord-tenant matters,

commercial transactions and other such matters can safely be dealt with by the Court by exercising its powers under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. in the event of a compromise, but this is not to say that the power is limited to such cases. There can never be any such rigid rule to prescribe the exercise of such power, especially in the absence of any premonitions to forecast and predict eventualities which the cause of justice may throw up during the course of a litigation.

(33) The only inevitable conclusion from the above discussion is that there is no statutory bar under the Cr.P.C. which can affect the inherent power of this Court under Section 482. Further, the same cannot be limited to matrimonial cases alone and the Court has the wide power to quash the proceedings even in noncompoundable offences notwithstanding the bar under Section 320 of the Cr.P.C., in order to prevent the abuse of law and to secure the ends of justice.

(34) The power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. is to be exercised Ex-Debitia Justitia to prevent an abuse of process of Court. There can neither be an exhaustive list nor the defined parameters to enable a High Court to invoke or exercise its inherent powers. It will always depend upon the facts and circumstances of each case. The power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. has no limits. However, the High Court will exercise it sparingly and with utmost care and caution. The exercise of power has to be with circumspection and restraint. The Court is a vital and an extraordinary effective instrument to maintain and control social order. The Courts play role of paramount importance in achieving peace, harmony and ever-lasting congeniality in society. Resolution of a dispute by way of a compromise between two warring groups, therefore, should attract the immediate and prompt attention of a Court which should endeavour to give full effect to the same unless such compromise is abhorrent to lawful composition of the society or would promote savagery."

7.

The legal principles as laid down for quashing of the criminal proceedings were also approved by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and another, (2012) 10 SCC 303. Furthermore, the broad principles for exercising the powers under Section 482 were summarized by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Parbatbhai Aahir @ Parbatbhai Bhimsinhbhai Karmur and others v. State of Gujarat and another, (2017) 9 SCC 641.

8.

Further, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held in Ramgopal and another v. State of Madhya Pradesh, 2021 SCC Online SC 834, that the matters which can be categorized as personal in nature or in the matter in which the nature of injuries do not exhibit mental depravity or commission of an offence of such a serious nature that quashing of which would override public interest, the Court can quash the FIR in view of the settlement arrived at amongst the parties. The observation of the Hon'ble Supreme Court is extracted as under:- "19.

We thus sum-up and hold that as opposed to Section 320 Cr.P.C. where the Court is squarely guided by the compromise between the parties in respect of offences 'compoundable' within the statutory framework, the extra-ordinary power enjoined upon a High Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. or vested in this Court under Article 142 of the Constitution, can be invoked beyond the metes and bounds of Section 320 Cr.P.C. Nonetheless, we reiterate that such powers of wide amplitude ought to be exercised carefully in the context of quashing criminal proceedings, bearing in mind: (i) Nature and effect of the offence on the conscious of the society; (ii) Seriousness of the injury, if any; (iii) Voluntary nature of compromise between the accused and the victim; & (iv) Conduct of the accused persons, prior to and after the occurrence of the purported offence and/or other relevant considerations." 9.

After hearing learned counsel for the parties and going through the material available on record, this Court finds that there appears to be substance in the submission of learned counsel for the petitioners that pendency of the present criminal litigation would be abuse of process of law since the chances of conviction of the petitioners are bleak in view of the compromise so effected between the private parties.

10.

The report alongwith statements of the affected parties received from learned Court below would reveal that the aggrieved person has genuinely effected a compromise with the petitioners and they have no objection if the impugned FIR and consequential proceedings are quashed. 11.

Keeping in view totality of the facts and circumstances of the case and taking into consideration the ratio of the judgments in the cases of Gian Singh (supra), Ramgopal (supra) and Kulwinder Singh (supra), this petition is accepted and FIR No. 102, dated 27.03.2020 (Annexure P-1), for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 120-B of IPC and Section 24 of Immigration Act, registered at Police Station Division No.5 Ludhiana, and all the consequential proceedings arising therefrom are hereby quashed qua the petitioner, in view of compromise dated 29.02.2023 (Annexure P-2).

12.

Petition stands disposed of.

(SANJAY VASHISTH) January 29, 2025 JUDGE Sangeeta Whether reasoned/speaking:

Yes/No Whether reportable:

Yes/No