Allowed

Jasvir Kaur & Orsq v. State of Punjab & Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC15 Sept 2010CRM-M/12132/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This petition sought quashing of an FIR under Sections 452, 323, 148, and 149 IPC based on a compromise. The court held that under Section 482 Cr.P.C., it has the power to quash non-compoundable offences where a compromise is executed to prevent abuse of process or secure justice.

What did the court decide?

FIR No. 76 dated 30.5.2008 under Sections 452, 323, 148, and 149 IPC and subsequent proceedings are quashed.

Jasvir Kaur & Orsq Vs State of Punjab & Ors. — Quashing and FIR | Punjab & Haryana HC (2010)

¶1

Crl.Misc. No. M-12132 of 2010 (O&M)

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH

¶4

Crl. Misc. No. M-12132 of 2010 (O&M) Date of Decision:September 15, 2010

¶5

Jasvir Kaur and others

¶6

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

¶7

Versus

¶8

State of Punjab and others

¶9

..........Respondents

¶10

Coram: Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Sabina

¶11

Present: Mr.Vishal Garg, Advocate for the petitioners Mr.Amandeep Singh Rai, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab Mr.Pyush Bansal, Advocate for respondent No.2

¶12

¶13

Sabina, J.

¶14

Petitioners have filed this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking quashing of FIR No. 76 dated 30.5.2008 under Sections 452, 323, 148, and 149 of the Indian Penal Code (`IPC' for short) registered at Police Station Amargarh (Annexure P1) and subsequent proceedings thereto on the basis of compromise dated 6.6.2010 (Annexure P2).

¶15

Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the parties with the intervention of relatives and friends have arrived at a compromise.

¶16

Respondent No.2, who is a minor is present in person along with his counsel and father-Satish Kumar and has stated that now with the

¶17

Crl.Misc. No. M-12132 of 2010 (O&M)

¶18

¶19

intervention of relatives and friends,parties have arrived at a compromise. Father of respondent No.2-Satish Kumar has tendered his affidavit, as per which, he has no objection if the FIR in question is ordered to be quashed. Respondent No.2 has also stated that he has no objection if the FIR in question is ordered to be quashed.

¶20

As per the Full Bench judgment of this Court in Kulwinder Singh and others vs. State of Punjab, 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052,

¶21

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

¶24

Crl.Misc. No. M-12132 of 2010 (O&M)

¶25

¶26

power which independently lies with this court to quash the criminal proceedings pursuant to the compromise arrived at, should at all be exercised?

¶27

24.On an overall view of the facts as indicated hereinabove and keeping in mind the decision of this 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. 76 dated 30.5.2008 under Sections 452, 323, 148, 149 IPC registered at Police Station Amargarh (Anneuxre P1) as well as the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom,are quashed .

¶30

( Sabina ) Judge

¶31

September 15, 2010

¶32

arya

Jasvir Kaur & Orsq v. State of Punjab & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jasvir Kaur & Orsq v. State of Punjab & Ors.

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

Harmander Singh & Ors. Vs State of Punjab & Anr.

Puran Chand and Ors. Vs Ut, Chd. and Anr.

Jagbir Singh Alias Jasbir Singh Vs State of Punjab

Joginder Ram Vs Davinder Kumar

Sarwan Singh Vs State of Punjab

Shamsher Singh Vs State of Punjab