Allowed

Mahavir and Anr. v. State of Haryana and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC11 Mar 2011CRM-M/32794/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Punjab and Haryana High Court allowed a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash criminal proceedings arising from a matrimonial dispute. Relying on a large settlement and recorded statements confirming the complainant's voluntary surrender of the case, the court held that continued litigation was futile and the compromise should be upheld to secure ends of justice and maintain social harmo

What did the court decide?

Impugned criminal proceedings arising from FIR No. 114 dated 11.8.2005 and all subsequent proceedings are quashed.

Mahavir and Anr. Vs State of Haryana… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Punjab & Haryana HC (2011)

¶1

¶2

Crl.Misc. No. M-32794 of 2010.

¶3

PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT, CHANDIGARH.

¶4

¶5

Crl.Misc. No. M-32794 of 2010. Date of decision: March 11, 2011.

¶6

¶7

Mahavir and another Versus The State of Punjab and another. ***

¶8

CORAM: Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Daya Chaudhary.

¶9

¶10

Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

¶11

Whether to be referred to the Reporters or not?

¶12

Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?

¶13

Present: Shri Krishan Singh, Advocate, for the petitioners.

¶14

Shri Gaurav Verma, AAG, Haryana, for the respondents.

¶15

¶16

Daya Chaudhary, J (Oral)

¶17

This petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, on behalf of Mahavir and Jaswant Singh, for quashing of FIR No. 114 dated 11.8.2005 registered under Sections 498-A, 406, 323 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, at Police Station Radaur District Yamuna Nagar, on the basis of compromise.

¶18

Notice of motion in the case was issued on November 10, 2010. While issuing notice of motion to the respondents, the trial court was directed to send the report with regard to the validity or otherwise of the compromise after recording the statements of the concerned parties. Pursuance to the directions issued by this Court on November 10, 2010, statements of the parties have been recorded by the trial court and a report in this regard has been placed on the record of this court wherein it has been stated that the statements of the parties had been recorded wherein the complainant has stated that she has compromised the dispute with the accused persons Mahavir and Jaswant Singh with the intervention of the respectables and the compromise is with free will. There is no pressure upon her. It is also mentioned that the statement has been made by the complainant without any fear, favour or pressure upon her.

¶19

As per the statement made by the complainant, it has been

¶20

¶21

Crl.Misc. No. M-32794 of 2010.

¶22

mentioned that the marriage with Mahavir Singh has been dissolved by way of decree of divorce dated 16.4.2009 under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 and the mother-in-law has expired during the pendency of proceedings.

¶23

Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that since the parties have compromised the dispute, the complainant has no objection in the quashing of the FIR, I am of the considered view that continuation of impugned criminal proceedings between the parties would be an exercise in futility. The complainant himself does not want to pursue these proceedings and it shall be merely a formality and sheer wastage of precious time of the Court as complainant would not support the case of the prosecution in view of the compromise between the parties. It would be in the interest of the parties as well as in the large interest of the society, peace and harmony and in order to save both the families from avoidable litigation that the compromise arrived at between them is accepted by this Court.

¶24

It has been observed by Hon'ble the Apex Court in Mrs. Shakuntla Sawhney Vs. Mrs. Kaushalya Sawhney (1980) 1 SCC 63 that “the finest hour of Justice arrives propitiously when parties, despite falling apart, bury the hatchet and weave a sense of fellowship of reunion” The power to do complete justice is the very essence of every judicial justice dispensation system. It cannot be diluted by distorted perceptions and is not a slave to anything, except to the caution and circumspection, the standards of which the Court sets before it, in exercise of such plenary and unfettered power inherently vested in it while donning the cloak of compassion to achieve the ends of justice. Relying on the views adopted by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the Five Judges Bench of this Court also observed in kulwant Singh V. State of Punjab 2007(3) R.C.R (Cri) 1052 that compounding of offence which are not compoundable under Section 320(9) Cr.P.C., offence non-compoundable but parties entering into compromise, High Court has the power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to allow the compounding of non-compoundable offences and quash the prosecution where the High Court felt that the same was required to prevent the abuse of the

¶25

Crl.Misc. No. M-32794 of 2010.

¶26

¶27

process of Court or to otherwise to secure the ends of justice.

¶28

While dealing with the issue of quashing of FIR on the basis of compromise, a Bench consisting of Five Hon'ble Judges of this Court in Kulwinder Singh's case (supra) while approving minority view in Dharambir V. State of Haryana 2005 (3) RCR (Criminal) 426: 2005(2) Apex Criminal 424: 2005 (2) Law Herald 723 (P&H) (FB), opined as under:-

¶29

“To conclude, it can safely be said that there can never be any hard and fast category which can be prescribed to enable the Court to exercise its power under Section 482, of the Cr.P.C. The only principle that can be laid down is the one which has been incorporated in the Section itself, ie, “to prevent abuse of the process of any Court” or “ to secure the ends of justice”.

¶30

No embargo, be in the shape of Section 320(9) Cr.P.C or any other such curtailment, can whittle down the power under Section 438 Cr.P.C.

¶31

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 Cr.P.C is used to enhance such a compromise which, in turn, enhances the social amity and reduced fiction, then it truly is “finest hour of justice”. Disputes which have their genesis in a matrimonial discord, landlordtenant matters, commercial transactions and other such matters can safely be dealt with by the Court by exercising its powers under Section 482 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 as litigation.

¶32

The only inevitable conclusion from the above discussion is that there is no statutory bar under the Cr.P.C, which can effect the inherent power of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. 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 Cr.P.C., in order to prevent the abuse of law and to secure the ends

¶33

Crl.Misc. No. M-32794 of 2010.

¶34

¶35

of justice.

¶36

The power under Section 482 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 parameters 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 Cr.P.C has no limits. However, the High Court will exercised it sparingly and with utmost care and caution. The exercise of power has to be with circumspection and restraint. The Court is 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 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.

¶37

Compromise in modern society is the sine qua non of harmony and orderly behaviour. As observed by Krishna Iyer J., the finest hour of justice arrives propitiously when parties despite falling apart, bury the hatchet and weave a sense of fellowship or reunion. Inherent power of the Court under Section 482 Cr. P.C is not limited to matrimonial cases alone. The Court has wide powers to quash the proceedings even in non-compoundable offences in order to prevent abuse of process of law and to secure ends of justice, notwithstanding bar under Section 320 Cr.P.C. Exercise of power in a given situation will depend on facts of each case. The duty of the Court is not only;y to decide a list between the parties after a protracted litigation but it is a vital and extra-ordinary instrument to maintain and control social order. Resolution of dispute by way of compromise is abhorrent to lawful composition of society or would promote savagery, as held in Kulwinder Singh's case (supra).

¶38

For the reasons recorded above and having regard to the principles laid down by the Five Judges Bench of this Court in case of Kulwinder Singh's case (supra), this petition is allowed and impugned criminal proceedings arising

¶39

5 Crl.Misc. No. M-32794 of 2010.

¶40

out of FIR No. 114 dated 11.8.2005 under Sections 498-A, 406, 323 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code registered at Police Station Radaur District Yamuna Nagar as well as all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom are quashed

¶41

March 11, 2011

¶42

(Daya Chaudhary) Judge

¶43

Malik

Mahavir and Anr. v. State of Haryana and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mahavir and Anr. v. State of Haryana and 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

Kuldeep Singh & Ors. Vs State of Punjab & Ors.

Indiabulls Securities Ltd. Vs Mahesh Kumar Sarswat

Balwinder Singh Vs State of Punjab

Vipin Kumar & Ors. Vs State of Punjab & Anr.

Kuldeep Singh Vs State of Punjab

Prabhjot Kaur and Another Vs State of Punjab and Others