Allowed

Gurbaksh Kaur and Ors. v. State of Punjab and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC21 Apr 2014CRM-M/18938/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Punjab & Haryana High Court allowed a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash an FIR involving non-compoundable offences, relying on a voluntary compromise. The court held that exercising inherent powers allows quashing despite non-compoundability to maintain peace.

What did the court decide?

Quashing of FIR No.673 dated 02.09.2008 and all consequential proceedings against the petitioners.

Gurbaksh Kaur and Ors. Vs State of Punjab and Ors. — Quashing and FIR | Punjab & Haryana HC (2014)

¶1

CRM-M No.18938 of 2013

¶2

-1-

¶3

Date of decision: April 21, 2014

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶5

Crl. Misc. No. M-18938 of 2013 (O&M)

¶6

Gurbaksh Kaur and others

¶7

.. Petitioners

¶8

Versus

¶9

State of Punjab and others.

¶10

.. Respondents

¶11

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURINDER GUPTA

¶12

Present: Mr. S.S. Sidhu, Advocate for the petitioners.

¶13

Ms. Shivali, AAG, Punjab.

¶14

Mr. Ashish Grover, Advocate for respondents No.2 and 3.

¶15

SURINDER GUPTA, J(Oral).

¶16

The petitioners have filed this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short, 'Cr.P.C.') seeking quashing of FIR No.673 dated 02.09.2008 (Annexure P-1), registered for offences punishable under Sections 380, 447, 441, 148 and 149 of Indian Penal Code (for short 'IPC') (Sections 457 and 309 IPC added later on) at Police Station Kotwali Bathinda, District Bathinda, along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of the compromise (Annexure P-2).

¶17

As per case of the prosecution, on 02.09.2008 at about 9.00 PM, at Hanuman Chowk, Bathinda, all the petitioners in prosecution of their common object, armed with deadly weapons, formed an unlawful assembly in order to commit rioting; lurking and criminal trespass by night

¶18

Mehta Sachin 2014.04.26 16:46 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CHANDIGARH

¶19

CRM-M No.18938 of 2013

¶20

-2-

¶21

by entering into the shop, which was in possession of Rashpal Singh in order to commit theft; and committed theft of table fan, battery, calculator and cash of Rs.37,000/- from the shop of Rashpal Singh. Petitioner Gurbax Kaur also attempted to commit suicide by pouring kerosene oil on her. Initially the FIR was lodged against Dalip Singh and unknown persons on the statement of complainant Rashpal Singh, respondent No.2. Dalip Singh has since expired. Later on, petitioners were involved in this case on the basis of statement of respondent No.3.

¶22

Upon notice, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab has put in appearance on behalf of respondent No.1-State and Mr. Ashish Grover, Advocate has put in appearance on behalf of respondents No.2 and 3.

¶23

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the

¶24

case file.

¶25

The parties were directed to appear before the trial court and get their statements recorded. The trial court has sent its report dated 3.2.2014 stating therein that the compromise has been effected in between the parties which appears to be voluntary in nature and without any pressure or influence.

¶26

Learned counsel for the respondents No.2 and 3 has submitted that in view of the compromise (Annexure P-2), the private respondents No.2 (complainant) and 3 have no objection if the impugned FIR (Annexure P-1) is quashed. Learned State counsel has also not disputed compromise (Annexure P-2).

¶27

The only obstacle in the way of accepting the compromise for Mehta Sachin quashing the impugned FIR is that the offences punishable under Sections 2014.04.26 16:46 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CHANDIGARH

¶28

CRM-M No.18938 of 2013

¶29

-3-

¶30

148, 380, 309 IPC are not compoundable. In case Kulwinder Singh vs. State of Punjab, 2007 (3) RCR (Crl.) 1052 , Full Bench of this Court has held that the FIR can be quashed on the basis of the compromise by exercising inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. even if the offence is not compoundable.

¶31

In the instant case, the compromise has been effected with the intervention of the respectables and now the parties wish to live in peace and harmony.

¶32

Keeping all the above facts in view, I am of the considered opinion that it is a fit case in which the impugned FIR should be quashed. Keeping the case pending will not serve the ends of justice. The quashing of the FIR will provide the parties opportunity to live in an amicable, peaceful and harmonious atmosphere which is not only in the interest of the parties to this petition but also for their families and ultimately the society at large. The offence in this case is not so heinous or serious that it cannot be settled by the parties through compromise.

¶33

In view of the above discussion, the instant petition is allowed and the impugned FIR (Annexure P-1) along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom qua present petitioners is quashed.

¶34

April 21, 2014 Sachin M.

¶35

(SURINDER GUPTA) JUDGE

¶36

Mehta Sachin 2014.04.26 16:46 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CHANDIGARH

Gurbaksh Kaur and Ors. v. State of Punjab and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gurbaksh Kaur 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

Kulwinder Kaur Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Sandeep Gurang Vs State of Punjab

Rakesh Kumar Vs State of Punjab &Ors

Santokh Singh Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Ali Mohd Vs State of Haryana & Ors.

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