Kabal Singh v. State Of Punjab And Another

CRM-M-57917-2023 --1--

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-57917-2023

Reserved on: 24.11.2023

Pronounced on: 01.12.2023 Kabal Singh ......Petitioner v.

State of Punjab and Another ......Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA Present: - Ms. Kamalpreet Kaur, Advocate for Mr. Deepak Arora, Advocate For the petitioner.

Mr. Ravinder Singh, AAG, Punjab.

Mr. G.B.S. Dhillon, Amicus curiae.

*** ANOOP CHITKARA J.

FIR No.

Dated Police Station Sections 14.08.2023 Vigilance Bureau, Range Amritsar, District Amritsar 420, 465, 467, 468, 471 IPC read with Section 7 of Prevention of Corruption Act Seeking quashing of FIR, based on the compromise, the petitioner has come up before this Court.

2.

Given the fact that one of the offence for which the petitioner has entered into out of court compromise under Section 7 of Prevention of Corruption Act, this Court had appointed Mr. G.B.S. Dhillon, Advocate as an amicus for assistance. 3.

I have heard counsel for the parties as well as the amicus, who has also handed over compendium on case law pertaining to the issue involved in the present case.

4.

Before considering the exercise power powers under Section 482 CrPC to quash the FIR, it is required that this Court would refer to the judicial pronouncements of Supreme Court in which non-compoundable offences were permitted to be ANJU RANI 2023.12.04 10:49 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CRM-M-57917-2023 --2-- compounded in exercise of such jurisdiction by the Supreme Court. 5.

In Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab and another2012(10) SCC 303, in para 57, A three judge Bench of the Hon'ble Supreme Court clarifies that offences under Prevention of Corruption Act or offence committed by a public servant while working in that capacity, cannot provide for any basis for quashing cannot be compromised. 6.

In Narinder Singh and others vs. State of Punjab and another, 2014(6) SCC 466, in para 31, Hon'ble Supreme Court reiterated that powers under Section 482 CrPC cannot be exercised to compound offences under Prevention of Corruption Act or the offences committed by public servants while working in that capacity merely because the matter was compromised between the victim and the offender. 7.

In Gold Quest International Private Limited vs. State of Tamil Nadu and others, 2014 (15) SCC 235, in para 8, Hon'ble Supreme Court reiterated that FIR cannot be quashed in Prevention of Corruption Act.

8.

Outcome of the above mentioned judicial pronouncements does not entitle this Court to exercise its powers under Section 482 CrPC to quash the FIR registered under Prevention of Corruption Act after compromising the matter with the complainant.

9.

Given above, the present petition is dismissed. Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.

(ANOOP CHITKARA) JUDGE 01.12.2023 anju rani Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes Whether reportable:

YES.

ANJU RANI 2023.12.04 10:49 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document