Allowed

Satya Devi and Ors. v. State of Punjab and Anr.

Punjab & Haryana HC21 Sept 2010CRM-M/10684/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash an FIR registered under forgery provisions. Relying on binding precedents, the court held that a valid compromise in the interest of justice warranted quashing the criminal proceedings despite the offences being non-compoundable.

What did the court decide?

FIR No.308 dated 7.8.2001 and all subsequent proceedings under Sections 467/471/120-B IPC quashed.

Satya Devi and Ors. Vs State of Punjab and Anr. — Quashing and FIR | Punjab & Haryana HC (2010)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

CRM M-10684 of 2010 (O&M) Date of Decision:21.9.2010

¶3

Satya Devi and others

¶4

.... Petitioners

¶5

Versus

¶6

State of Punjab and another

¶7

.... Respondents

¶8

CORAM: Hon'ble Ms. Justice Nirmaljit Kaur

¶9

Present: Mr. S.S. Majithia, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. K.S. Pannu, D.A.G. Punjab.

¶10

Mr. Vinay Puri, Advocate for respondent No.2.

¶11

¶12

1.Whether Reporters of Local Newspapers may be allowed to see the judgment?

¶13

2.To be referred to the Reporters or not?

¶14

3.Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?

¶15

NIRMALJIT KAUR, J.(Oral)

¶16

Crl. M. No.38894 of 2010

¶17

Allowed as prayed for.

¶18

Crl. M. No.10684-M of 2010

¶19

The present petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of FIR No.308 dated 7.8.2001 under Sections467/471/120-B IPC Police Station Sadar Ludhiana and subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise entered into between the parties.

¶20

The FIR in question was got registered by respondent No.2 against the petitioners on the allegations of forgery and fabrication. However, the matter has been compromised. Compromise deed (Annexure P-2) has been placed on record. An Affidavit of respondent No.2 authenticating the compromise has been placed on record. As per the compromise deed/affidavit the matter has been compromised due to the intervention of the respectable of the area. It is further stated that she has

¶21

CRM M-10684 of 2010 (O&M)

¶22

-2-

¶23

entered into the said compromise out of her own free will and she has no objection if the FIR in question is quashed.

¶24

The Full Bench of this Court, in the case of Kulwinder Singh and others v. State of Punjab and another 2007(3) RCR (Criminal) 1052 has held that 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 not only in matrimonial discord but others as well, such compromise deserves to be accepted. It is further held as under:-

¶25

“ 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 noncompoundable 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.”

¶26

In the case of Madan Mohan Abbot v. State of Punjab 2008

¶27

(4) S.C. Cases 582, the Apex Court emphasised and advised as under:-

¶28

“ We need to emphasise that it is perhaps advisable that in disputes where the question involved is of a purely personal nature, the court should ordinarily accept the terms of the compromise even in criminal proceedings as keeping the matter alive with no possibility of a result in favour of the prosecution is a luxury which the courts, grossly overburdened as they are, cannot afford and that the time so saved can be

¶29

CRM M-10684 of 2010 (O&M) -3utilised in deciding more effective and meaningful litigation. This is a common sense approach to the matter based on ground of realities and bereft of the technicalities of the law.”

¶30

Taking into account that the compromise has been effected between the parties, compromise deed (Annexure P-2) and the affidavit of respondents No.2 stating that she has no objection if the FIR is quashed, it is a fit case where there is no impediment in the way of the Court to exercise its inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of FIR in the interest of justice.

¶31

Accordingly, the present petition is allowed and FIR No.308 dated 7.8.2001 under Sections467/471/120-B IPC Police Station Sadar Ludhiana and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom are hereby quashed.

¶32

21.9.2010 rajeev

¶33

( NIRMALJIT KAUR ) JUDGE

Satya Devi and Ors. v. State of Punjab and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Satya Devi and Ors. v. State of Punjab 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

Sewa Singh & Ors. Vs State of Punjab

Nasib Singh Vs State of Punjab

Darshan Singh Vs State of Punjab

Surjit Singh Vs State of Punjab

Surjeet Kaur Vs State of Haryana

Naresh Kumar Vs State of Punjab