Raman Kumar v. State Of Punjab And Others
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH CRM-M-46073-2023 (O&M) Date of decision : 13.12.2023 Raman Kumar ... Petitioner(s)
Versus
State of Punjab & Ors.
... Respondent(s) CORAM : HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ALKA SARIN Present :
Mr. Abhishek Khullar, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Harjinder Singh Sidhu, AAG Punjab for respondent No.1. Mr. Atinderpal Singh, Advocate for respondent No.2. Ms. Shikha, Advocate for respondent No.3.
ALKA SARIN, J. (ORAL) 1.
The present petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for quashing of FIR No.6 dated 07.01.2023 under Sections 363, 366 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 registered at Police Station Sadar Gurdaspur, District Gurdaspur, and all subsequent proceedings arising out of the said FIR, on the basis of compromise dated 31.08.2023 (Annexure P-1).
2.
On 14.09.2023 the following order was passed :
"The present petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for quashing of FIR No.06 dated 07.01.2023 under Sections 363, 366 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 registered at Police Station Sadar Gurdaspur, District Gurdaspur, and all other consequential proceedings arising therefrom, on the ground that the parties have since compromised the matter vide compromise deed dated 31.08.2023 (Annexure P-1).
Learned counsel for the petitioners would contend that the parties have since settled their disputes and that the complaint was filed by the mother of the victim. It is further the contention that the victim and the petitioner solemnized their marriage and have also been blessed with a child on 12.07.2023. A compromise dated 31.08.2023 has been appended with the present petition as Annexure P-1. Learned counsel for the petitioners has relied upon the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in "Gian Singh V/s State of Punjab & Anr." [2012 (10) SCC 303] and the Larger Bench's judgment of this Court in "Kulwinder Singh & Ors. Vs. State of Punjab & Anr." [2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052].
Notice of motion.
On the asking of the Court, Mr. Adhiraj Singh, AAG Punjab accepts notice on behalf of respondent No.1State. Mr. Ashutosh Pandey, Advocate accepts notice on behalf of respondent No.2 while Mr. Jasmeet Singh, Advocate accepts notice on behalf of respondent No.3. Copy of the petition has already been supplied to the counsel for the parties.
Learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2 states that respondent No.2 would have no objection if the aforesaid FIR is quashed in view of the compromise arrived at between the parties.
Learned counsel appearing for respondent No.3 has also reiterated that respondent No.3 has no objection if the aforesaid FIR is quashed in view of the compromise arrived at between the parties.
List on 13.12.2023.
Meanwhile, the parties are directed to appear before the concerned CJM/Illaqa Magistrate/Trial Court on 17.10.2023, or on any other date convenient to the Court, for recording of their statements. The CJM/Illaqa Magistrate/Trial Court is directed to record the statements of the parties to its satisfaction qua the genuineness of the compromise and that the same is not the result of any undue influence, coercion or pressure of any kind. A report, along-with the statements of the parties, on the following points be sent to this Court before the next date of hearing :
1) Whether the settlement/compromise dated 31.08.2023 (Annexure P-1) has been freely entered into between the parties without any undue influence, coercion or pressure of any kind.
2) Whether any other criminal cases are pending against the parties.
3) Whether any proclamation proceedings are pending against either of the parties."
3.
Pursuant to the order dated 14.09.2023 a report dated 27.10.2023 of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gurdaspur has been
received by this Court wherein it has been stated that the statements of the parties have been recorded and the parties have stated that they have compromised the matter voluntarily without any threat, pressure, undue influence or fraud and that respondent Nos.2 and 3 have no objection to the quashing of the present FIR. Statements of the parties have also been appended with the report.
4.
The Apex Court in the case of Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab & Anr. [2012 (10) SCC 303] has held as under : "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 what cases power to quash the criminal proceeding or complaint or F.I.
R may be exercised where the offender and victim have settled their dispute would depend on the facts and circumstances of each case and no category can be prescribed. However, before exercise of such power, the High Court must have due regard to the nature and gravity of the crime. Heinous and serious offences of mental depravity or offences like murder, rape, dacoity, etc.
dispute. Such offences are not private in nature and have serious impact on society. Similarly, any compromise between the victim and offender in relation to the offences under special statutes like Prevention of Corruption Act or the offences committed by public servants while working in that capacity etc; cannot provide for any basis for quashing criminal proceedings involving such offences. But the criminal cases having overwhelmingly and pre-dominatingly civil flavour stand on different footing for the purposes of quashing, particularly the offences arising from commercial, financial, mercantile, civil, partnership or such like transactions or the offences arising out of matrimony relating to dowry, etc.
or the family disputes where the wrong is basically private or personal in nature and the parties have resolved their entire dispute. In this category of cases, High Court may quash criminal proceedings if in its view, because of the compromise between the offender and victim, the possibility of conviction is remote and bleak and continuation of criminal case would put accused to great oppression and prejudice and extreme injustice would be caused to him by not quashing the criminal case despite full and complete settlement and compromise with the victim.
question(s) is in affirmative, the High Court shall be well within its jurisdiction to quash the criminal proceeding."
5.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has also referred to the law laid down by this Court in Kulwinder Singh & Ors. vs. State of Punjab & Anr. [2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052] wherein it has been held that even in non-compoundable offences, if the parties have entered into a compromise, this Court has wide powers under Section 482 CrPC to quash the proceedings to prevent abuse of law and secure the ends of justice. 6.
In view of the above and keeping in view the report by the Trial Court that the parties have genuinely entered into a compromise and all the disputes between the parties have been resolved, it would not be in the interest of justice to continue the criminal proceedings. 7.
Resultantly, FIR No.06 dated 07.01.2023 under Sections 363, 366 of IPC registered at Police Station Sadar Gurdaspur, District Gurdaspur is quashed, including all subsequent proceedings arising out of the said FIR, on the basis of compromise dated 31.08.2023 (Annexure P-1). 8.
The petition is accordingly allowed. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed off.
13.12.2023 ( ALKA SARIN ) JUDGE NOTE: Whether speaking/non-speaking: Speaking Whether reportable: YES/NO