The High Court allowed a petition under Section 482 CrPC to quash an FIR and subsequent proceedings based on a compromise between the parties, citing precedents that permit quashing non-compoundable offences to secure the ends of justice.
FIR No.88 dated 9.7.2009 and consequent proceedings were quashed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Crl. Misc. No. M- 17017 of 2010 (O&M)
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Crl. Misc. No. M- 17017 of 2010 (O&M) Date of Decision: September 13, 2010
Bhupinder Singh and others
........Petitioners
Versus
State of Punjab and another
........Respondents
CORAM : HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA
Present: Mr. P.S. Baath, Advocate, for the petitioners.
Mr. Amandeep Singh Rai, AAG, Punjab.
Mr. Arvind Kashyap, Advocate, for respondent No.2.
Respondent No.2 in person.
SABINA, J.
Petitioners have filed this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing of FIR No.88 dated 9.7.2009, under Sections 325,324,323,506,34 of Indian Penal Code (in short 'IPC'), Police Station Bassi Pathana, District Fatehgarh Sahib and consequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise.
Learned counsel for the petitioners have submitted that the parties have arrived at a compromise with the intervention of the relatives and friends.
Respondent No.2, who is present in person in the Court along with his counsel, has filed his reply by way of an affidavit. Respondent No.2
Crl. Misc. No. M- 17017 of 2010 (O&M)
2
has admitted the factum of compromise between the parties and as per the affidavit, submitted by the respondent No.2, he has no objection if the FIR in question is ordered 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, 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.
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.26 and 24 has held as under :-
“26. 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 facts. 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?
Crl. Misc. No. M- 17017 of 2010 (O&M)
3
Since the parties have arrived at a compromise and have decided to live in peace, no useful purpose would be served in allowing these criminal proceedings to continue.
Accordingly, the present petition is allowed. The FIR No.88 dated 9.7.2009, under Sections 325,324,323,506,34 of IPC, Police Station Bassi Pathana, District Fatehgarh Sahib and consequent proceedings, arising therefrom, are quashed.
September 13, 2010 Anand
(SABINA) JUDGE
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court can quash criminal proceedings under Section 482 CrPC upon a compromise between parties in a non-compoundable offence to prevent abuse of process.
Whether quashing is restricted to matrimonial disputes or extends to other cases involving civil disputes with criminal overtones.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Kulwinder Singh and others vs. State of PunjabFollowed¶23
Kulwinder Singh and others vs. State of Punjab, 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052
Nikhil Merchant vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and anotherFollowed¶24
Nikhil Merchant vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another JT 2008 (9) SC 192 · Who else cites this
B.S. JoshiReferred¶28
B.S. Joshi's case
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Bhupinder Singh
State of Punjab
Sabina
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
