Petitioner challenged FIR underSections 279/337/338/427 IPC via Section 482 plea citing compromise. Court quashed FIR allowing quashing in non-compoundable offences where compromise reduces friction.
FIR No.20 dated 13.2.2011 under Sections 279/337/338/427 IPC and all subsequent proceedings 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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CRM M-14770 of 2011
Date of Decision:17.2.2012
Rupinder Pal Singh
.... Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab and another
.... Respondents
CORAM: Hon'ble Ms. Justice Nirmaljit Kaur
Present: Mr. Ranjit Singh, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Kirat Singh Sidhu, D.A.G. Punjab. Mr. S.S. Sodhi, Advocate for respondent No.2.
2.To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3.Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?
NIRMALJIT KAUR, J.(Oral)
The present petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of FIR No.20 dated 13.2.2011 under Sections 279/337/338/427 IPC Police Station Charinda, Amritsar and subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise entered into between the parties.
The FIR in question was got registered by respondent No.2. However, the matter has been compromised due to the intervention of the respectable of the area. Affidavits (Annexures P-2 and P-3) have also been placed on record in this regard.
The parties are present in the Court along with their respective counsel. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 has placed on record the affidavit of respondent No.2-complainant as well as one Yashpal, who is also an affected party, admitting the factum of compromise. As per the said affidavits, respondent No.2 has no objection if the FIR in question is quashed.
-2-
CRM M-14770 of 2011
The Full Bench of this Court, in the case of Kulwinder Singh 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:-
“ 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 noncompoundable 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 case of Madan Mohan Abbot v. State of Punjab 2008
(4) S.C. Cases 582, the Apex Court emphasised and advised as under:-
“ We need to emphasise that it is perhaps advisable that in 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
CRM M-14770 of 2011 technicalities of the law.”
-3-
Taking into account that the compromise has been effected between the parties and the affidavits of respondent No.2 as well as one Yashpal, who is also an affected party stating that they have no objection if the FIR is quashed, it is a fit case where there is no impediment in the way of the Court to exercise its inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of FIR in the interest of justice.
Accordingly, the present petition is allowed and FIR No.20 dated 13.2.2011 under Sections 279/337/338/427 IPC Police Station Charinda, Amritsar and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom are hereby quashed.
( NIRMALJIT KAUR ) JUDGE
17.2.2012 rajeev
2 issues framed by the court
Whether FIR under non-compoundable offences can be quashed pursuant to a compromise between parties.
Whether inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. extend beyond matrimonial disputes to other civil quarrels.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Kulwinder Singh and others v. State of Punjab and anotherApplied¶20
Kulwinder Singh and others v. State of Punjab and another 2007(3) RCR (Criminal) 1052
Madan Mohan Abbot v. State of PunjabReferred¶24
Madan Mohan Abbot v. State of Punjab 2008 (4) S.C. Cases 582
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Rupinder Pal Singh
State of Punjab
another
Nirmaljit Kaur
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
