Allowed

Lukesh Gupta v. State of Punjab and Anr.

Punjab & Haryana HC23 Feb 2011CRM-M/34831/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A single judge of the Punjab and Haryana High Court allowed a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash an FIR registered under Sections 406 and 498-A IPC. The Court found that a valid compromise existed between the parties, the complainant had no objection to quashing, and continuing proceedings would be a waste of time and an abuse of process despite the offences being non-compoundable.

What did the court decide?

The FIR registered with Police Station Mohali and all subsequent proceedings arising from it were quashed.

Lukesh Gupta Vs State of Punjab and Anr. — Domestic Violence | Punjab & Haryana HC (2011)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

¶3

Crl. Misc. No. M-34831 of 2010 Date of Decision:23.02.2011

Lukesh Gupta

.....Petitioner

Vs.

State of Punjab and another

¶8

.....Respondent

¶9

CORAM:- HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE DAYA CHAUDHARY

¶10

Present:Mr. N.S. Dandiwal, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶11

Mr. L.S. Virk, DAG, Punjab.

¶12

Mr. B.S. Mittal, Advocate for respondent No.2.

¶13

¶14

DAYA CHAUDHARY, J.(Oral)

¶15

This petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C on behalf of the petitioner – Lukesh Gupta for quashing of FIR No.94 dated 15.3.2010 registered under Sections 406 and 498-A IPC at Police Station Mohali on the basis of compromise dated 15.11.2010 annexed as Annexure P-3 with the petition.

¶16

Notice of motion was issued on 29.11.2010.

¶17

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the matter has been compromised between the parties and the complainant has no objection in quashing of the FIR. Learned counsel for the petitioner also submits that in compliance of the compromise deed (Annexure P-3), out of total amount of Rs.13,50,000/-, an amount of Rs.6,75,000/- was paid to the complainant at the time of hearing petition bearing No. M-25802 of 2010 for anticipatory bail and the balance amount of Rs.6,75,000/- has been paid today by way of demand draft bearing No.107868 dated 8.9.2010 in favour

¶18

-2-

¶19

Crl. Misc. No. M-34831 of 2010

¶20

of Dr. Amita in the Court today, which has been accepted by the complainant, who is present in the Court and has been identified by her counsel and also stated before this Court that she has no objection in quashing of the FIR. Learned counsel further submits that petition under Section 13-B of Hindu Marriage Act is pending before the trial Court for 4.6.2011.

¶21

Petitioner is present in the Court and he has also affirmed the factum of compromise.

¶22

Since the matter has been compromised between the parties and the complainant has no objection in 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 prosecution in view of 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.

¶23

It has been observed by Hon'ble the Apex Court in Mrs. Shakuntala Sawhney v. 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

¶24

Crl. Misc. No. M-34831 of 2010 -3-

¶25

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

¶26

While dealing with 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:-

¶27

“ 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, i.e, “to prevent abuse of the process of any Court” or “ to secure the ends of justice”.

¶28

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

¶29

-4-

¶30

Crl. Misc. No. M-34831 of 2010

¶31

Cr.P.C.

¶32

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 reduces friction, then it truly is “finest hour of justice.” Disputes which have their genesis in a matrimonial discord, landlord-tenant 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 a litigation.

¶33

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 ofd 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 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 of justice.

¶34

The power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is to be exercise ExDebitia 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 exercise it sparingly and with

¶35

Crl. Misc. No. M-34831 of 2010

¶36

-5-

¶37

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.

¶38

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 of 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 noncompoundable 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 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 between two warring groups should be encouraged unless such compromise is abhorrent to lawful composition of society or would promote savagery, as held in Kulwinder Singh's case (supra).

¶39

For the reasons recorded above and having regard to the principles laid sown by the Five -Judges Bench of this Court in case of

¶40

-6-

¶41

Crl. Misc. No. M-34831 of 2010

¶42

Kulwinder Singh's case (supra), this petition is allowed and impugned criminal proceedings arising out of FIR No.94 dated 15.3.2010 registered under Sections 406 and 498-A IPC at Police Station Mohali as well as all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom are quashed.

¶43

February 23, 2011 ( DAYA CHAUDHARY ) renu JUDGE

Lukesh Gupta v. State of Punjab and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Lukesh Gupta 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

Baljit Kaur Vs State of Punjab

Reet Mohinder Singh & Anr. Vs State of Punjab & Ors.

Sanjay Gill @ Sanju Vs State of Punjab

Devenderjeet Singh Vs State of Haryana

Rajneesh and Ors. Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Rajneesh & Ors. Vs State of Haryana & Anr.