Gaurav And Others v. State Of Haryana And Another

-1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

Date of Decision: 10.04.2024 Gaurav @ Gaurav Kumar and others .... Petitioners

Versus

State of Haryana and another .... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA Present: - Mr. Vishal Khatkar, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Aditya Pal Singla, AAG, Haryana.

Mr. Ajit Singh, Advocate for Mr. Neeraj Saini, Advocate for respondent No. 2. NIDHI GUPTA, J. (ORAL) The petitioners who are husband (petitioner No. 1) and parents-in-law (petitioners No. 2 and 3) of complainant-respondent No. 2 herein, have filed the present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C., for quashing of FIR No. 222 dated 13.08.2022 (Annexure P-1) registered under Sections 323, 406, 498-A and 506 read with Section 34 IPC at Police Station City Nighdu, District Karnal and all the consequential proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise dated 29.09.2023 (Annexure P-2) arrived at between the parties. Pursuant to the order dated 06.11.2023 passed by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court, the parties appeared before the learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Karnal, to get their statements recorded. Learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Karnal, has submitted his report along with copies of the statements of the parties vide letter dated

-221.12.2023 duly forwarded by the learned District and Sessions Judge, Karnal.

A perusal of the above said report would show that the petitioners and respondent No. 2 have appeared and suffered statements with respect to the compromise, which have been found to be made voluntary and without any pressure. It has also been reported that petitioner No. 1 and respondent No. 2 complainant have reconciled and started living together as husband and wife.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the present FIR emanates from the matrimonial dispute between the parties. It is submitted that the matter has been amicably settled between the parties vide compromise dated 29.09.2023 (Annexure P-2) and petitioner No. 1 and respondent No. 2 have started living together. Further, it is submitted that initially, the present FIR was lodged against 04 persons, however, upon investigation, the challan was presented only against the present petitioners and they have never been declared as proclaimed offender(s). Learned State counsel has stated that he has 'no objection' in case the FIR is quashed on the basis of compromise qua the petitioners.

This Court has heard the learned counsel for the parties and has perused the file.

After perusing the report submitted by the learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Karnal, this Court finds that the matter has been amicably settled between the petitioners and respondent No. 2. Since the matter has been settled and the parties have decided to live in peace, this Court feels that in order to secure the ends of justice, the criminal

-3proceedings deserve to be quashed.

As per the Full Bench judgment of this Court in "Kulwinder Singh and others Vs State of Punjab", 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052, it is held that High Court has power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to allow the compounding of non-compoundable offence and quash the proceedings where the High Court is of the opinion that the same is required to prevent the abuse of the process of law or otherwise to secure the ends of justice. This power of quashing is not confined to matrimonial disputes alone.

Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of "Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab and another", 2012 (4) RCR (Criminal) 543, had also observed that in order to secure the ends of justice or to prevent the abuse of process of Court, inherent power can be used by this Court to quash criminal proceedings in which a compromise has been effected. The relevant portion of para 57 of the said judgment is reproduced here-inbelow:- "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."

-4In view of what has been discussed here-in-above, this petition is allowed and FIR No. 222 dated 13.08.2022 (Annexure P-1) registered under Sections 323, 406, 498-A and 506 read with Section 34 IPC at Police Station City Nighdu, District Karnal and all the consequential proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise dated 29.09.2023 (Annexure P-2), are ordered to be quashed qua the petitioners.

10.04.2024 ( NIDHI GUPTA ) rishu JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No