Allowed

Nand Singh v. State of Punjab & Anr.

Punjab & Haryana HC14 May 2012CRM-M/15783/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Punjab and Haryana allowed a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash criminal proceedings initiated under Sections 323/452/506 IPC and Section 3(x) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. The court relied on a post-compromise report and precedent to hold that inherent powers allow quashing to prevent abuse of the process of law and se

What did the court decide?

Criminal Complaint No.185 dated 10.10.2007, summoning order dated 13.5.2008, and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom were quashed.

Nand Singh Vs State of Punjab & Anr. — Caste Atrocities | Punjab & Haryana HC (2012)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

CRM M-15783 of 2010 Date of Decision:14.5.2012

Nand Singh

.... Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab and another

¶7

.... Respondents

¶8

CORAM: Hon'ble Ms. Justice Nirmaljit Kaur

¶9

Present: Mr. A.S. Sivia, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Kirat Singh Sidhu, D.A.G. Punjab. Mr. Sansar Kundu, Advocate for respondent No.2.

¶10

¶11

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

¶12

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

¶13

NIRMALJIT KAUR, J.(Oral)

¶14

The present petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of Criminal Complaint No.185 dated 10.10.2007 under Sections 323/452/506 IPC read with Section 3(x) of the Scheduled Caste and Schedules Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and summoning order dated 13.5.2008 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Muktsar and subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise entered into between the parties.

¶15

The complaint in question was got registered by respondent No.2. However, during the pendency of the present petition, the matter has been compromised due to the intervention of the respectables of the area.

¶16

Vide order dated 28.2.2012, the parties were directed to

¶17

-2-

¶18

CRM M-15783 of 2010

¶19

appear before the trial Court on 13.3.2012 and the trial Court was directed to record the statements of the parties and send its report with respect to the compromise.

¶20

In pursuance to the same, report of the Judge, Special Court, Sri Muktsar Sahib, has been received. As per the said report, the statements of the parties were recorded. It is further submitted that as per the statements of the parties, the Court is satisfied that the parties have effected compromise and made their statements in the Court voluntarily.

¶21

Thus, there is no doubt that the matter has been compromised.

¶22

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:-

¶23

“ 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

¶24

-3-

¶25

CRM M-15783 of 2010

¶26

alone and the Court has thewide 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.”

¶27

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

¶28

2008 (4) S.C. Cases 582, the Apex Court emphasised and advised as under:-

¶29

“ 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 technicalities of the law.”

¶30

Taking into account that the compromise has been effected between the parties and the report received from the learned Judge, Special Court, Sri Muktsar Sahib, 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

CRM M-15783 of 2010

-4-

justice.

Accordingly, the present petition is allowed and Criminal Complaint No.185 dated 10.10.2007 under Sections 323/452/506 IPC read with Section 3(x) of the Scheduled Caste and Schedules Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and summoning order dated 13.5.2008 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Muktsar and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom are hereby quashed.

¶35

14.5.2012 rajeev

¶36

( NIRMALJIT KAUR ) JUDGE

Nand Singh v. State of Punjab & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nand Singh v. State of Punjab & 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

Gurdial Singh and Others Vs State of Punjab and Others

Nitin Modi Vs State of Punjab and Others

Surjeet Kaur Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Gurnam Singh and Ors. Vs State of Punjab and Anr.

Vijay Kumar Vs State of Punjab and Another

Atul Kumar & Anr. Vs State of Haryana & Anr.