Quashed

Deepinder Singh and Ors. v. Ut of Chandigarh and Anr.

Punjab & Haryana HC11 Aug 2008CRM-M/17124/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court quashed the FIR and subsequent proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C. accepting a valid compromise between parties in a case involving alleged forgery and cheating. The judgment relied on precedent establishing that Sections 320 Cr.P.C. do not bar quashing in compromise cases to prevent abuse of process.

What did the court decide?

FIR No.232 dated 14.6.2005 along with subsequent proceedings were quashed.

Deepinder Singh and Ors. Vs Ut of Chandigarh and… — Quashing and FIR | Punjab & Haryana HC (2008)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

¶2

CHANDIGARH.

¶3

Criminal Misc.17124-M of 2008

¶4

DATE OF DECISION : AUGUST 11, 2008

¶5

DEEPINDER SINGH AND ORS.

¶6

....... PETITIONER(S)

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

STATE OF U.T. CHANDIGARH & ANR. .... RESPONDENT(S)

¶9

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA

¶10

PRESENT: Mr. Anshuman Dalal, Advocate, for the petitioner(s).

¶11

Mr. Pawan Sharma, Advocate, for Mr. DD Sharma, Advocate, for UT Chandigarh.

¶12

AJAI LAMBA, J. (Oral)

¶13

This petition has been filed under Section 482, Code of Criminal Procedure, for quashing FIR No.232 dated 14.6.2005 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B, Indian Penal Code, Police Station, Sector 17, Chandigarh (Annexure P-1) and subsequent proceedings.

¶14

The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that on intervention of respectables, both the sides have entered into a compromise. Compromise deed dated 12.7.2005 has been placed on record as Annexure P-2.

¶15

Learned counsel for the respondent-State, on instructions from SI Davinder Singh, states that, in fact, the parties have entered into a compromise and continuance of the proceedings would not serve any legal

¶16

Criminal Misc.11911-M of 2008

¶17

¶18

purpose.

¶19

This Court in a full Bench (5 Judges) has considered the issue of quashing of proceedings in view of compromise in Kulwinder Singh vs. State of Punjab, 2007(3) RCR(Criminal) 1052 (Full Bench). The following has been held in paras 28 to 30:-

¶20

“28. The compromise, in a modern society, is the sine qua non of harmony and orderly behaviour. It is the soul of justice and if the power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C is used to enhance such a compromise which, in turn, enhances the social amity and reduces friction, then it truly is “finest hour of justice”. Disputes which have their genesis in a matrimonial discord, landlord-tenant matters, commercial transactions and other such matters can safely be dealt with by the Court by exercising its powers under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C in the event of a compromise, but this is not to say that the power is limited to such cases. There can never be any such rigid rule to prescribe the exercise of such power, especially in the absence of any premonitions to forecast and predict eventualities which the cause of justice may throw up during the course of a litigation.

¶21

The only inevitable conclusion from the above discussion is that there is no statutory bar under the Cr.P.C which can affect the inherent power of this Court under Section 482. Further, the same cannot be limited to matrimonial cases alone and the Court has the wide power to quash the proceedings even in non-compoundable offences notwithstanding the bar under Section 320 of the Cr.P.C in order to prevent the abuse of law and to secure the ends of justice.

¶22

The power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C is to be exercised Ex-Debitia Justitia to prevent an abuse of process of Court. There can neither be an exhaustive list nor the defined para meters to enable a High Court to invoke or exercise its inherent powers. It will always depend upon the facts and circumstances of each case. The power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C has no limits. However, the High Court will exercise it sparingly and with utmost care and caution. The exercise of power has to be with circumspection and restraint. The Court is a vital and an extra ordinary effective instrument to maintain and control social order. The Courts play role of paramount importance in achieving peace, harmony and ever-lasting congeniality in society. Resolution of a dispute by way of a compromise between two warring groups, therefore, should

¶23

Criminal Misc.11911-M of 2008

¶24

¶25

attract the immediate and prompt attention of a Court which should endeavour to give full effect to the same unless such compromise is abhorrent to lawful composition of the society or would promote savagery.”

¶26

Having regard to the facts of the case that the parties have entered into a compromise, which stands recorded on the investigation file also, as has been stated by the learned counsel for the respondent-State, continuance of the proceedings would not serve any purpose.

¶27

In view of the above, the petition is allowed, FIR (Annexure

¶28

P-1) along with subsequent proceedings, is quashed.

¶29

August 11, 2008 ( AJAI LAMBA ) Kang JUDGE

Deepinder Singh and Ors. v. Ut of Chandigarh and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Deepinder Singh and Ors. v. Ut of Chandigarh and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shaiwal Gupta and Anr. Vs State of Punjab and Anr.

Tarsem Kumar Sharma Vs State of Punjab and Anr.

Mangal Singh Vs State of Punjab and Anr.

Mohan Lal Vs State of Punjab and Anr.

Gurdev Singh Khatra Vs State of Punjab and Anr.

Santokh Singh Vs State of Punjab and Anr.