Allowed

Sukhwant Singh & Anr. v. State of Punjab & Anr.

Punjab & Haryana HC18 May 2009CRM-M/10505/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Punjab & Haryana allowed a petition under Section 482 CrPC to quash an FIR and subsequent proceedings. Relying on a compromise between the parties, the Court held that continuing criminal prosecution would be futile and abused the process of the court.

What did the court decide?

FIR No. 63/01 dated 7.7.2001 and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom quashed.

Sukhwant Singh & Anr. Vs State of… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Punjab & Haryana HC (2009)

¶1

Crl.Misc. M No. 10505 of 2009

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH

¶4

Crl. Misc. M No. 10505 of 2009 Date of Decision:May 18, 2009

¶5

Sukhwant Singh and another

¶6

...........Petitioners

¶7

Versus

¶8

State of Punjab and another

¶9

..........Respondents

¶10

Coram: Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Sabina

¶11

Present: Mr.R.S.Chauhan Advocate for the petitioners.

¶12

Mr.Amandeep Singh Rai,Assistant Advocate General, Punjab Mr.Manohar Dadwal, Advocate for respondent No.2

¶13

¶14

Sabina, J.

¶15

Petitioners have filed this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking quashing of FIR No. 63/01 dated 7.7.2001 under Sections 419, 467, 468, 471, 120-B of the Indian Penal Code (`IPC' for short) registered at Police Station Verowal District Tarn Taran on the basis of compromise dated 7.3.2009 (Annexure P1 ) and all the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom.

¶16

Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the parties are closely related to each other and now parties with the intervention of relatives and friends have arrived at a compromise.

¶17

Respondents No.2, who is present in person along with his

¶18

counsel, has admitted the contents of the compromise (Annexure P1) and has stated that he has no objection, if the FIR in question is quashed.

¶19

¶20

Crl.Misc. M No. 10505 of 2009

¶21

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

¶22

Hon'ble the Apex Court in the case of Nikhil Merchant vs. Central bureau of Investigation and another JT 2008 (9) SC 192 in para Nos. 23 and 24 has held as under:-

¶23

“23. In the instant case, the disputes between the Company and the Bank have been set at rest on the basis of the compromise arrived at by them whereunder the dues of the Bank have been cleared and the Bank does not appear to have any further claim against the Company. What, however, remains is the fact that certain documents were alleged to have been created by the appellant herein in order to avail of credit facilities beyond the limit to which the Company was entitled. The dispute involved herein has overtones of a civil dispute with certain criminal facets. The question which is required to be answered in this case is whether the power which independently lies with this court to quash the criminal proceedings pursuant to the compromise arrived at, should at all be exercised?

¶24

24.On an overall view of the facts as indicated hereinabove and keeping in mind the decision of this

¶25

Crl.Misc. M No. 10505 of 2009

¶26

¶27

Court in B.S.Joshi's case (supra) and the compromise arrived at between the Company and the Bank as also clause 11 of the consent terms filed in the suit filled by the Bank, we are satisfied that this is a fit case where technicality should not be allowed to stand in the way in the quashing of the criminal proceedings, since, in our view, the continuance of the same after the compromise arrived at between the parties would be a futile exercise.”

¶28

Since the parties have arrived at a compromise, in order to live in peace, no useful purpose would be served by proceeding further with the criminal proceedings.

¶29

Accordingly, this petition is allowed. FIR No. 63/01 dated 7.7.2001 registered under Sections 419, 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC at Police Station Verowal, District Tarn Taran and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom,are quashed .

¶30

( Sabina ) Judge

¶31

May 18, 2009

¶32

arya

Sukhwant Singh & Anr. v. State of Punjab & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sukhwant Singh & Anr. v. State of Punjab & 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

Avtar Singh Vs State of Punjab

Ram Kishan Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Sarika Kumari & Anr. Vs State of Haryana & Ors.

Devinder Singh Dhariwal & Ors. Vs State of Punjab & Ors.

Tarsem Singh etc. Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Surinder Joshi and Another Vs State of Punjab and Others