Writ petition allowed quashing FIR No.70 based on compromise between petitioner and complainant. Court invoked inherent powers under Sec 482 Cr.P.C. to end litigation consistent with social amity post-2007 precedent.
FIR No.70 dated 17.5.2007 under Sections 323, 341, 506, 148, 149 IPC and all consequential proceedings are 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.
CRM No. M-7941 of 2010
-1-
IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH
CRM No. M-7941 of 2010 (O&M) Date of Decision: 11th November, 2011
Joginder Singh & others
……… Petitioners Versus
State of Punjab & another
………… Respondents
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH
Present : Mr. A.K. Garg, Advocate for the petitioners.
Mr. G.S. Brar, Asstt. A.G., Punjab.
Mr. Rajiv Joshi, Advocate for respondent No.2.
AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH, J. (Oral)
Prayer in this petition is for quashing of FIR No.70 dated 17.5.2007 under Sections 323, 341, 506, 148, 149 IPC registered at Police Station City Khanna, District Ludhiana on the basis of a compromise, which has been entered into between the parties. Copy of the compromise dated 10.3.2010 has been placed on record as Annexure P-2.
Counsel for the petitioners contend that during the pendency of the trial with the intervention of the Panchayat Members, respectable of both the families and the community, the matter has been amicably settled and as per the compromise the respondent No.2 – complainant does not want to further pursue the case against the petitioners. He accordingly prays that the present petition be allowed.
Counsel for the respondent does not dispute the factual assertion made by the counsel for the petitioners. In the reply, which has been filed in Court by way of an affidavit dated 11.5.2010, respondent No.2- Balvir Singh son of Sadhu Singh has admitted the factum of compromise dated 10.3.2010 (Annexure P-2).
CRM No. M-7941 of 2010
-2-
Balvir Singh son of Sadhu Singh resident of village Ubhawal Tehsil and District Sangrur, respondent No.2-complainant is present in Court, who is identified by his counsel and HC Gurwinder Kumar, Police Station City Khanna. Balvir Singh states that the compromise (Annexure P-2) has indeed been entered into between the parties. He does not have any objection to the quashing of the FIR in the light of the compromise entered into between the parties.
Having heard the counsel for the parties and in the light of the compromise dated 10.3.2010 and the statement made by the complainant Balvir Singh in Court today the interest of justice would require that the proceedings which were initiated on the basis of an FIR on a complaint made by Balvir Singh, against the petitioners and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom be quashed so that a dispute having been amicably resolved could further be fortified.
A Larger Bench of this Court in the case of Kulwinder Singh & Ors. Vs. State of Punjab & Anr. 2007(3) RCR(Criminal) 1052, while discussing the scope of quashing of prosecution on the basis of compromise, in exercise of powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. ,even in non-compoundable offence(s), it was held as under:-
“28. 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 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 of the 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.
29. 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
CRM No. M-7941 of 2010
-3-
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 non-compoundable 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.”
In the light of statement of complainant -Balvir Singh son of Sadhu Singh and in the light of compromise entered into between the parties, the interest of justice would be duly served by putting an end to the present litigation as the parties have by amicable settlement resolved the dispute and such resolution of dispute would be conducive to the well being of the society and would further curtail subsequent dispute which may have arisen and could be an off shoot of their present dispute.
In view of the above, the present petition is allowed. FIR No.70 dated 17.5.2007 under Sections 323, 341, 506, 148, 149 IPC registered at Police Station City Khanna, District Ludhiana and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom are hereby quashed.
11th November, 2011 (AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH) 'sp' JUDGE
1 issue framed by the court
Whether FIR and consequential proceedings can be quashed on compromise in a non-compoundable offence under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Kulwinder Singh & Ors. Vs. State of Punjab & Anr.Relied on¶23
2007(3) RCR(Criminal) 1052
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Joginder Singh & others
State of Punjab
Augustine George Masih
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
