Allowed

Honey @ Gujjar and Ors. v. State of Punjab and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC4 Oct 2012CRM-M/14123/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court of Punjab and Haryana allowed a criminal miscellaneous petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash an FIR for offences under sections 148, 323, 324, 341 read with 149 IPC. The court held that despite non-compoundability, proceedings could be quashed due to a valid compromise ensuring peace and preventing abuse of process.

What did the court decide?

FIR No.151 dated 9.12.2011 registered at Police Station Division No.3, Jalandhar, and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom were quashed.

Honey @ Gujjar and Ors. Vs State of Punjab and Ors. — Quashing and FIR | Punjab & Haryana HC (2012)

¶1

Crl. Misc. No.M-14123 of 2012

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

Criminal Misc. No. M-14123 of 2012 (O&M) Date of Decision : October 4^th , 2012

¶5

Honey @ Gujjar @ Rajinder and others

¶6

.... petitioners

¶7

Versus

¶8

State of Punjab and others

¶9

.... Respondents

¶10

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJENDER SINGH MALIK

¶11

1.Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2.Whether to be referred to the Reporters or not? 3.Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?

¶12

Present Mr. Deepak Arora, Adocate, for the petitioners.

¶13

Mr. Mikhail Kad, A. A.G., Punjab, for the State. Mr. G.S.Rawat, Advocate, for respondents No. 2 and 3.

¶14

VIJENDER SINGH MALIK, J.

¶15

Honey @ Gujjar @ Rajinder and four others, the petitioners have brought this petition under the provisions of section 482 Cr. P.C., for quashing of FIR No.151 dated 9.12.2011, registered at Police Station Division No.3, Jalandhar (Annexure P1) for an offence punishable under sections 148, 323, 324, 341 read with section 149 of Indian Penal Code with all the subsequent proceedings arising out of the same, on the basis of compromise arrived at between the parties.

¶16

Vide orders dated 27.8.2012, passed by this court, the parties were directed to appear before the trial court in order to make statements

¶17

Crl. Misc. No.M-14123 of 2012

¶18

¶19

with regard to the compromise arrived at between them. Learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jalandhar recorded the statements of the parties and submitted her report vide letter dated 14.09.2012. According to her, the parties have compromised the matter.

¶20

Compromise not only brings peace and harmony between the parties to a dispute but also restores tranquility in the society. Taking restoration of peace and harmonious relations between the parties and order in the society as the prime concerns of law, it was held in Dharambir Vs. State of Haryana, 2005 (3) RCR (Criminal) 426 by this court that a non compoundable matrimonial offence could be quashed on the basis of compromise between the parties to achieve the aforesaid object.

¶21

A Larger Bench of five Hon`ble Judges of this court in Kulwinder Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab and another 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052 , has taken the following decision regarding the other non-compoundable offences:-

¶22

“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 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.”

¶23

In view of the above mentioned decisions, the FIRs in noncompoundable offences could be quashed on the basis of compromise.

¶24

Crl. Misc. No.M-14123 of 2012

¶25

¶26

However, before accepting the petition and quashing the proceedings, the court has to satisfy itself that the compromise is just and fair in which no party is taking undue benefit. Simultaneously, it has to be seen that the compromise is free from undue pressure. Once it is found that the compromise is just and fair and is not brought about by undue pressure of one party upon the other, the court has then to see that the quashing of FIR would secure the ends of justice or would prevent abuse of process of law.

¶27

Keeping in view the aforesaid facts, continuation of the prosecution for the aforesaid offence, in the said FIR where the respondents No. 2 and 3 would not be supporting the allegations against the petitioners at the trial, would be a futile exercise. Therefore, I accept the petition and quash FIR No.151 dated 9.12.2011, registered at Police Station Division No.3, Jalandhar (Annexure P1) for an offence punishable under sections 148, 323, 324, 341 read with section 149 along with all the subsequent proceedings arising out of the same.

¶28

(VIJENDER SINGH MALIK) JUDGE

¶29

October 4^th , 2012 som

Honey @ Gujjar and Ors. v. State of Punjab and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Honey @ Gujjar and Ors. v. State of Punjab 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

Bimla Vs State of Punjab

Savita Sood and Anr. Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Jagpreet Singh Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Sudesh Vs State of Haryana

Amrik Singh Vs State of Punjab and Anr.

Kalu @ Satedner Vs State of Haryana