Harjit Singh And Others v. State Of Punjab And Others

 

 
           
 

!"#"

$% &'(&&(



)

   

) ((((

"

"

$ *# + *#,# )        

) ((( #- $ $

%

 ./ )( )

 0 

)

 




  
  





 




!"
  
 


$ %

&



)

 ( (1*23





 

#


'%(

)$
 * +

,-
$ .%
 
%% /0 %/&


.1
.%/
.2'
.22 .20
.0
%/3)

-4
+

#
 
 

 



##

* #
+
+





 
 
/( /( %/%.

56
3%7

% 8 
# 
#


 

#
+
+

  # &


4
9#
+





  .

/ %/%.


 

 


 #
4:-## *

+  
+

 
9
+ 




 %

















.

 


 


 
%( / %/%.
 
 


; #

+ 

4# 



 #


 
  #
 
 




 




  
9
 
 
 

 
 

#
9


<
  
 

 

,-

*

*  

 9


+
9
<

#



'


,##
)


4






    

   

!

"#
#
 
8+
4
 
9
 
.(%
4 

##9

+

3 #

 * 


9

8+
4



9
 

 
9  *








# 9

9



 
 
9

* +




  #

# 8= #


4


 

$





       "

%

!

#% 
 
 
 


 












4
 9
 


<

4

* 
 #
+

9

 

 
# 


 
'0


  +
 
 3
"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.

xxx xxx xxx. "

-
9


3
+
+



  #
4
+ +
 #
#
9

57

 #  

4

 
* +

,-
9##


*

## 
9

 










<
  

# 

 #
# 

#

9#


 +

+










 +



 



*  (

# #<




##9

,-
$ .%
  %% /0 %/&


.1
.%/
.2'
.22
.20
.0
%/3)

-4
+


#
 
 

 
 #

##

* +

* 
*

57





  
56
%7
 

 <



 ////:3



 

 
># 
,
- ?


4 + 
9



  9.

Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stands disposed of.
























)

 &'(&&(  4$

- >
 "+: 

:$ >
 #

:$