Sharanjeet Kaur v. State Of Punjab

-1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

Date of Decision: 11.11.2022 Sharanjeet Kaur .... Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab and others .... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR VERMA Present: - Mr. Sandeep Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Hakam Singh, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab. Mr. Manoj Sharma, Advocate for respondents No. 2 to 5. ASHOK KUMAR VERMA, J. (ORAL) The petitioner has filed the present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C., for quashing FIR No. 85 dated 05.07.2022 (Annexure P-1) registered under Sections 406, 420 and 120-B IPC and Section 13 of Punjab Travel Professionals (Regulation) Act, 2014 at Police Station Division No. 1, District Police Commissionerate, Jalandhar and all the consequential proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise dated 03.09.2022 (Annexure P-2) effected between the parties. Pursuant to the order dated 07.09.2022, passed by this Court, the parties appeared before the learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Jalandhar, to get their statements recorded. Learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Jalandhar, has submitted her report along with copies of statements of the parties vide letter No. 388 dated 07.11.2022, duly

-2forwarded by the learned District and Sessions Judge, Jalandhar, vide letter No. 3669 G/JRK dated 09.11.2022.

I have heard learned Counsel for the petitioner, learned State Counsel, learned counsel for respondents No. 2 to 5 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.

-3549: Narinder Singh Vs. State of Punjab (Supreme Court) : 2014 (2) RCR (Criminal) 482, State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Laxmi Narayan and others (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 Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Jalandhar, is satisfied that the compromise is voluntary, genuine and without any coercion or undue influence.

Considering the report of learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Jalandhar and the fact that the compromise will bring peace and harmony between the parties, aforesaid FIR No. 85 dated 05.07.2022 (Annexure P-1) and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom, are quashed, qua petitioner-Sharanjeet Kaur, only. Disposed of, accordingly.

November 11, 2022 (ASHOK KUMAR VERMA) rishu JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No