Sandeep Kumar And Others v. State Of Haryana And Others

-1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

Date of Decision: 21.09.2022 Sandeep Kumar and others .... Petitioners

Versus

State of Haryana and others .... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR VERMA Present: - Mr. S.S. Kainth, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Tanuj Sharma, Assistant Advocate General, Haryana. Mr. Deepak Kumar Bartia, Advocate for respondents No. 2 to 5.

ASHOK KUMAR VERMA, J. (ORAL) Separate Vakalatnamas filed on behalf of respondents No. 2 to 5 are taken on record.

The petitioners have filed the present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C., for quashing FIR No. 232 dated 10.10.2021 (Annexure P-1), registered under Sections 148, 149, 323, 324 and 506 IPC (Section 326 IPC was added later on) at Police Station Radaur, District Yamuna Nagar and all the consequential proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise in the shape of affidavits dated 25.10.2021 (Annexures P-2 to P-5, respectively) effected between the parties. Pursuant to the order dated 03.11.2021, passed by this Court, the parties appeared before the learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Jagadhri, to get their statements recorded. Learned Judicial Magistrate Ist

-2Class, Jagadhri, submitted his report along with statements of the parties vide letter No. 350 dated 25.11.2021 duly forwarded by learned District and Sessions Judge, Yamuna Nagar, vide letter No. 17745 dated 25.11.2021.

I have heard learned Counsel for the petitioners, 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.

-3victim 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. 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, Jagadhri, is satisfied that the compromise effected between the parties is genuine, voluntary and without any coercion or undue influence.

Considering the report of learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Jagadhri dated 25.11.2021 and the fact that the compromise will bring peace and harmony between the parties, aforesaid FIR No. 232 dated 10.10.2021 (Annexure P-1) and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom, are quashed, qua the petitioners only. Disposed of, accordingly September 21, 2022 (ASHOK KUMAR VERMA) rishu JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No