Allowed

Amarjeet Singh and Ors. v. State of Punjab and Anr.

Punjab & Haryana HC19 Jul 2012CRM-M/12211/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Punjab and Haryana quashed an FIR and subsequent proceedings under Section 482 CrPC following a verified voluntary compromise between parties in a case involving IPC offences, relying on precedent allowing quashing in non-matterimonial disputes.

What did the court decide?

FIR No. 213 dated 21.7.2008 and all subsequent proceedings under IPC Sections 452, 447, 148, 149, 323, 506 are quashed.

Amarjeet Singh and Ors. Vs State of Punjab and Anr. — Quashing and FIR | Punjab & Haryana HC (2012)

¶1

-1 -

¶2

Crl. Misc. No. M-12211 of 2011 (O&M)

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

¶4

Crl. Misc. No. M-12211 of 2011 (O&M) Date of Decision: 19.7.2012.

¶5

Amarjit Singh and others

¶6

........Petitioners

¶7

Vs.

¶8

State of Punjab and another

¶9

......Respondents

¶10

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA

¶11

Present: Mr. A.D.S.Sukhija, Advocate for the petitioners.

¶12

Mr. Amandeep Singh Rai, DAG, Punjab.

¶13

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

¶14

SABINA, J.

¶15

Petitioners have filed this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for quashing of the FIR No. 213 dated 21.7.2008 under Section 452, 447, 148, 149, 323, 506 of the Indian Penal Code (' IPC ' for short) registered at Police Station Kharar, S.A.S Nagar, Mohali (Annexure P-1) and all the consequential proceedings arising therefrom in view of the compromise (Annexure P-2) arrived at between the parties.

¶16

Vide order dated 28.9.2011, the trial court was directed to record the statements of the parties and submit report qua the genuineness of the compromise. In pursuance to the said order, trial court after recording the statements of the parties has reported that the parties have voluntarily entered into a compromise in respect of the offences mentioned in the

¶17

-2 -

¶18

Crl. Misc. No. M-12211 of 2011 (O&M)

¶19

FIR and the compromise has been effected without any fear and without any kind of pressure from any side.

¶20

As per the Full Bench judgment of this Court in

¶21

Kulwinder Singh and others vs. State of Punjab, 2007 (3)

¶22

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.

¶23

Hon'ble the Apex Court in the case of Nikhil

¶24

Merchant vs. Central bureau of Investigation and another JT

¶25

2008 (9) SC 192 in para Nos. 23 and 24 has held as under:-

¶26

“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 power which independently lies with this court to quash the criminal proceedings pursuant to the compromise arrived at,

¶27

Crl. Misc. No. M-12211 of 2011 (O&M)

¶28

-3 -

¶29

should at all be exercised?

¶30

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.”

¶31

Since the parties have arrived at a compromise and have decided to live in peace, no useful purpose would be served in allowing the criminal proceedings to continue.

¶32

Accordingly, the present petition is allowed. FIR No. 213 dated 21.7.2008 under Section 452, 447, 148, 149, 323, 506 IPC, registered at Police Station Kharar, S.A.S Nagar, Mohali (Annexure P-1) and all the subsequent proceedings, arising therefrom, are quashed

¶33

(SABINA) JUDGE

¶34

July 19, 2012 Gurpreet

Amarjeet Singh and Ors. v. State of Punjab and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amarjeet Singh and Ors. 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

Dilbag Singh and Ors. Vs State of Haryana and Anr.

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

Robert Gaaru Vs State of Punjab and Anr.

Sukhdev Singh Vs Harjinder Singh and Ors.

Anokh Singh and Ors. Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Charnajit Singh & Anr. Vs State of Punjab & Anr.