Rajinder Kumar Batra And Others v. State Of Punjab And Another
2024:PHHC:027962 Page 1 of 4
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-58658-2023 (O&M) Date of order: 27.02.2024 Rajinder Kumar Batra & Others .....Petitioner(s) Vs.
State of Punjab & Another .....Respondent(s)
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA Present:- Mr. Karandeep S. Sidhu, Advocate for the petitioners.
Mr. Sukhsandesh Singh Chahal, AAG Punjab.
Mr. Judgepreet Singh Warring, Advocate for respondent No.2.
***** Nidhi Gupta, J.
The prayer in this petition is for quashing of FIR No.37 dated 04.05.2023 (Annexure P-1) under Sections 406, 498-A, 323 and 506 IPC registered at Police Station Arni Wala, District Fazilka and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise dated 11.10.2023 (Annexure P-2) arrived at between the parties. Vide order dated 01.02.2024, a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court had directed the parties to appear before Illaqa Magistrate for getting their statements recorded in terms of certain parameters given in the aforesaid order dated 01.02.2024 with regard to the compromise dated 11.10.2023 (Annexure P-2).
In terms of the order dated 01.02.2024, passed by a Coordinate Bench of this Court, parties have appeared before the Court of
2024:PHHC:027962 Page 2 of 4 Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Fazilka and as per his report dated 20.02.2024 submitted to this Court, both the parties have got recorded their respective statements in Court.
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 voluntary, genuine, and out of free will.
Learned counsel for the petitioners inter alia submits that present FIR emanates from a matrimonial dispute between the parties, which was registered by respondent No.2/complainant against present petitioners who are father-in-law, mother-in-law and husband respectively, of respondent No.2/complainant. Challan has not yet been filed in the matter. As per agreement dated 11.10.2023 (Annexure P2), petitioner No.3/husband and respondent No.2/wife would dissolve their marriage and petitioners have to pay Rs.15 lakh to respondent No.2 out of which Rs.7.5 lakh was paid on first motion statement under Section 13-B of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 dated 17.10.2023; and for recording of second motion statement, the matter is fixed for 18.04.2024. It is also submitted that petitioners were not declared proclaimed offenders in the present case and all the accused are a party to the compromise. Learned State Counsel and learned counsel for respondent No.2 do not dispute the above said submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioners.
This Court has heard the learned counsel for the parties and has perused the file.
2024:PHHC:027962 Page 3 of 4 After perusing the report submitted by the Illaqa Magistrate, this Court finds that the matter has been amicably settled between the petitioners and the complainant. 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 proceedings 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 hereinbelow:- "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
2024:PHHC:027962 Page 4 of 4 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 view of what has been discussed hereinabove, this petition is allowed and FIR No.37 dated 04.05.2023 (Annexure P-1) under Sections 406, 498-A, 323 and 506 IPC registered at Police Station Arni Wala, District Fazilka and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise dated 11.10.2023 (Annexure P-2) arrived at between the parties, are ordered to be quashed qua the petitioners. Petition stands disposed of.
Pending application(s) if any also stand(s) disposed of. 27.02.2024 (Nidhi Gupta) Sunena Judge Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No