Allowed

Jaswant Singh and Others v. State of Punjab and Others

Punjab & Haryana HC22 May 2012CRM-M/1423/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed petitions to quash an FIR and related complaints arising from a caste-related incident. Relying on a settlement and compromise between parties, the court invoked its inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to terminate proceedings in the interest of justice and social harmony.

What did the court decide?

FIR No.120 and Complaint No.RBT No.98 along with subsequent proceedings were quashed in the interest of justice based on a genuine compromise between the parties.

Jaswant Singh and Others Vs State of Punjab and… — Caste Atrocities | Punjab & Haryana HC (2012)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

Crl. M. No.M-1423 of 2012 Date of Decision:22.5.2012

¶3

Jaswant Singh and others

¶4

.... Petitioners

¶5

Versus

¶6

State of Punjab and another

¶7

.... Respondents

¶8

And

¶9

Crl. M. No.M-6586 of 2012 Date of Decision:22.5.2012

¶10

Sarwan Singh and others

¶11

.... Petitioners

¶12

Versus

¶13

Jaswant Singh and others

¶14

.... Respondents

¶15

CORAM: Hon'ble Ms. Justice Nirmaljit Kaur

¶16

Present: Mr. Sanjay Gupta, Advocate for the petitioners (In Crl. M. No.M-1423 of 2012) Mr. N.K. Suneja, Advocate for the petitioners (In Crl. M. No.M-6586 of 2012) Mr. K.D. Sachdeva, Addl. A.G. Punjab. Ms. Sarika Gupta, Advocate for respondent No.2 (In Crl. M. No.M-1423 of 2012)

¶17

¶18

1.Whether Reporters of Local Newspapers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2.To be referred to the Reporters or not?

¶19

3.Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?

¶20

NIRMALJIT KAUR, J. (Oral)

¶21

The instant petitions have been filed for quashing of FIR No.120 dated 14.6.2002 registered under Sections 452,323,307,34 IPC at Police Station Hariana, Hoshiarpur as well as for quashing of complaint No.RBT No.98 of 23.9.02/21.3.05 under Sections 323, 324, 452, 379, 148 IPC and Section 3(1) (x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise entered into between the parties.

¶22

Facts in brief are that the FIR in question was got registered by

¶23

Crl. M. No.M-1423 of 2012

¶24

-2-

¶25

respondent No.2. Whereas in respect of the same occurrence as a counter blast to the FIR in question, complaint in question was filed by Parkash Singh son of Sharda Ram, who has since expired. Now, the present complaint is being represented by Jaswant Singh-respondent No.1, Sukhwinder Singh-respondent No.2 (Being sons of Parkash SinghComplainant) and one Tarsem Singh. However, the matter has been compromised between the parties due to the intervention of the respectable of the area. Compromise deed (Annexure P-2 and P-4) has also been placed on record in both the petitions.

¶26

Vide order dated 23.1.2012 passed in Crl. M. No.M-1423 of 2012, the parties were directed to appear before the trial Court and the trial Court was further directed to record the statements of the parties and send the report with respect to the compromise as to whether the same is genuine or not.

¶27

In pursuance to the same, report from the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Hoshiarpur has been received wherein it is submitted that the statements of the complainant Swaran Singh as well as Jaswant Singh, Sukhwinder Singh and Tarsem Singh (respondents in the complaint case) were recorded in the Court with respect to the fact of compromise of the matter in dispute. Compromise was also placed on the file. From their statements, it appears that the matter in dispute has been compromised between the parties and the same is a genuine one.

¶28

No doubt FIR in question was got registered under Section 307 IPC, however, learned State counsel on instructions from ASI Satwinder Singh submits that offence under Section 307 and 452 IPC stand deleted and supplementary challan has now been filed under Sections 323 and 324

¶29

-3-

¶30

Crl. M. No.M-1423 of 2012

¶31

IPC.

¶32

Taking into account the report received from the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Hoshiarpur stating that the matter has been compromised and the statement made by learned State counsel that offence under Section 307 and 452 IPC stand deleted and supplementary challan has now been filed under Sections 323 and 324 IPC, there is no impediment in the way of this Court for quashing of the FIR in question as well as complaint on the basis of compromise arrived at between the parties.

¶33

The Full Bench of this Court, in the case of Kulwinder Singh

¶34

and others v. State of Punjab and another 2007(3) RCR (Criminal) 1052 has held that 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 not only in matrimonial discord but others as well, such compromise deserves to be accepted. It is further held as under:-

¶35

“ 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.”

¶36

In the case of Madan Mohan Abbot v. State of Punjab 2008

¶37

(4) S.C. Cases 582, the Apex Court emphasised and advised as under:-

¶38

“ We need to emphasise that it is perhaps advisable that in

¶39

Crl. M. No.M-1423 of 2012 -4-

¶40

disputes where the question involved is of a purely personal nature, the court should ordinarily accept the terms of the compromise even in criminal proceedings as keeping the matter alive with no possibility of a result in favour of the prosecution is a luxury which the courts, grossly overburdened as they are, cannot afford and that the time so saved can be utilised in deciding more effective and meaningful litigation. This is a common sense approach to the matter based on ground of realities and bereft of the technicalities of the law.”

¶41

In view of the settled position of law and in the facts of the present case, it is a fit case where there is no impediment in the way of the Court to accept the compromise and exercise its inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of FIR in the interest of justice to promote peace and harmony. The compromise is entered into without any pressure

¶42

Accordingly, the instant petitions are allowed and FIR No.120 dated 14.6.2002 registered under Sections 452,323,307,34 IPC at Police Station Hariana, Hoshiarpur as well as complaint No.RBT No.98 of 23.9.02/21.3.05 under Sections 323, 324, 452, 379, 148 IPC and Section 3 (1) (x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise entered into between the parties are hereby quashed in the interest of justice.

¶43

A photo copy of this order be placed on the another connected

¶44

case.

¶45

22.5.2012 ( NIRMALJIT KAUR ) rajeev JUDGE

Jaswant Singh and Others v. State of Punjab and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jaswant Singh and Others v. State of Punjab and Others

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

Paramjeet Kaur & Anr. Vs Jasvir Kaur

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

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

Pardeep Kumar and Others Vs State of Punjab and Another

Jasmeet Kaur and Anr. Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Rinka & Another Vs State of Punjab & Anr.