Allowed

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

Punjab & Haryana HC1 May 2012CRM-M/21384/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court quashed an FIR under Section 431 IPC registered due to a cheque dispute after confirming that the parties had entered a valid compromise. Relying on Supreme Court precedents, the court held that inherent powers could be exercised to secure the ends of justice despite the offence being non-compoundable.

What did the court decide?

FIR No.154 under Section 431 IPC and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom were quashed.

Makhan Singh and Ors. Vs State of Punjab and Anr. — Cheque Dishonour | Punjab & Haryana HC (2012)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

CRM M-21384 of 2010

¶3

Date of Decision:1.5.2012

¶4

Makhan Singh and others

¶5

.... Petitioners

¶6

Versus

¶7

State of Punjab and another

¶8

.... Respondents

¶9

CORAM: Hon'ble Ms. Justice Nirmaljit Kaur

¶10

Present: Mr. K.V. Aggarwal, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Navdeep Sukhna, D.A.G. Punjab. Mr. Jaswinder Singh, Advocate for respondent No.2.

¶11

¶12

1.Whether Reporters of Local Newspapers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2.To be referred to the Reporters or not? 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 FIR No.154 dated 29.4.2009 under Section 431 IPC Police Station Division No.4, Jalandhar and subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise entered into between the parties.

¶15

The FIR in question was got registered by respondent No.2. However, the matter has been compromised due to the intervention of the respectables of the area. Compromise deed (Annexure P-3) has also been placed on record in this regard.

¶16

Vide order dated 29.2.2012, the affected parties were directed to be present before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jalandhar on 15.3.2012 and the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jalandhar was directed to record their respective statements with

¶17

-2-

¶18

CRM M-21384 of 2010

¶19

regard to compromise and submits its report in this regard.

¶20

In pursuance to the same, report of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jalandhar, has been received. As per the said report, the statements of the parties were recorded wherein it has been stated that with the intervention of the respectable persons, the matter has been compromised between the parties and they they are making statements without any pressure and coercion.

¶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 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

¶24

CRM M-21384 of 2010

¶25

-3-

¶26

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 Chief Judicial Magistrate, 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.

¶31

Accordingly, the present petition is allowed and FIR No.154 dated 29.4.2009 under Section 431 IPC Police Station Division No.4, Jalandhar and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom are hereby quashed.

¶32

1.5.2012 ( NIRMALJIT KAUR ) rajeev JUDGE

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Makhan 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

Surender Duhan Vs State of Haryana & Ors.

Neesha Devi and Anr. Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Gurdeep Kaur & Anr. Vs State of Punjab & Ors.

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

Som Lal Vs State of Punjab

Ranjit Kaur & Ors. Vs State of Punjab & Ors.