The High Court allowed a petition under Section 482 CrPC to quash an FIR for assault and mischief based on a genuine compromise between parties, citing inherent powers to secure ends of justice.
FIR No. 81 dated 19.4.2014 under Sections 323, 324, 447, 427, 148, 149 IPC and all consequential proceedings are 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.
Crl. Misc. No. M-22044 of 2014
-1 -
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.
Crl. Misc. No. M-22044 of 2014 Date of Decision: 01.12.2014.
Bhupinder Singh and others
........Petitioners
Vs.
State of Punjab and another ......Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA
Present: Mr. L.S.Mann, Advocate for the petitioners.
Mr. Deep Singh, AAG, Punjab.
SABINA, J.
Petitioners have filed this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for quashing of FIR No. 81 dated 19.4.2014, under Section 323, 324, 447, 427, 148, 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (' IPC ' for short), registered at Police Station Shahkot, District Jalandhar City and all the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise dated 25.6.2014 effected between the parties.
Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that now the parties have amicably settled their dispute.
Vide order dated 23.9.2014, Trial Court was directed to record the statements of the parties and send its report with regard to genuineness of the compromise effected between the parties.
In pursuance to the said order, Trial Court after recording the statements of the parties has reported that the
GURPREET SINGH 2014.12.02 15:36 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh
-2 -
Crl. Misc. No. M-22044 of 2014
compromise effected between the parties was genuine.
As per the Full Bench judgment of this Court in Kulwinder Singh and others vs. State of Punjab, 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052, High Court has power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to allow the compounding of non-compoundable offence and quash the prosecution where the High Court felt that the same was required to prevent the abuse of the process of any Court or to otherwise secure the ends of justice. This power of quashing is not confined to matrimonial disputes alone.
Hon'ble the Apex Court in the case of Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab and another 2012 (4) RCR (Crl.) 543 , has held as under:-
“57. The position that emerges from the above discussion can be summarised thus: the power of the High Court in quashing a criminal proceeding or FIR or complaint in exercise of its inherent jurisdiction is distinct and different from the power given to a criminal court for compounding the offences under Section 320 of the Code. Inherent power is of wide plenitude with no statutory limitation but it has to be exercised in accord with the guideline engrafted in such power viz; (i) to secure the ends of justice or (ii) to prevent abuse of the process of any Court. In what cases power to quash the criminal proceeding or complaint or F.I.R may be exercised where the offender and victim have settled their dispute would depend on the facts and circumstances of each case and no category can be prescribed. However, before
GURPREET SINGH 2014.12.02 15:36 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh
Crl. Misc. No. M-22044 of 2014
-3 -
exercise of such power, the High Court must have due regard to the nature and gravity of the crime. Heinous and serious offences of mental depravity or offences like murder, rape, dacoity, etc. cannot be fittingly quashed even though the victim or victim’s family and the offender have settled the dispute. Such offences are not private in nature and have serious impact on society. Similarly, any compromise between the victim and offender in relation to the offences under special statutes like Prevention of Corruption Act or the offences committed by public servants while working in that capacity etc; cannot provide for any basis for quashing criminal proceedings involving such offences. But the criminal cases having overwhelmingly and pre-dominatingly civil flavour stand on different footing for the purposes of quashing, particularly the offences arising from commercial, financial, mercantile, civil, partnership or such like transactions or the offences arising out of matrimony relating to dowry, etc. or the family disputes where the wrong is basically private or personal in nature and the parties have resolved their entire dispute. In this category of cases, High Court may quash criminal proceedings if in its view, because of the compromise between the offender and victim, the possibility of conviction is remote and bleak and continuation of criminal case would put accused to great oppression and prejudice and
GURPREET SINGH 2014.12.02 15:36 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh
Crl. Misc. No. M-22044 of 2014
-4 -
extreme injustice would be caused to him by not quashing the criminal case despite full and complete settlement and compromise with the victim. In other words, the High Court must consider whether it would be unfair or contrary to the interest of justice to continue with the criminal proceeding or continuation of the criminal proceeding would tantamount to abuse of process of law despite settlement and compromise between the victim and wrongdoer and whether to secure the ends of justice, it is appropriate that criminal case is put to an end and if the answer to the above question(s) is in affirmative, the High Court shall be well within its jurisdiction to quash the criminal proceeding.”
Since the parties have arrived at a compromise and have decided to live in peace, no useful purpose would be served in allowing the criminal proceedings to continue.
Accordingly, this petition is allowed. FIR No. 81 dated 19.4.2014 under Section 323, 324, 447, 427, 148, 149 IPC, registered at Police Station Shahkot, District Jalandhar City and all the consequential proceedings, arising therefrom, are quashed.
(SABINA) JUDGE
December 01, 2014 Gurpreet
GURPREET SINGH 2014.12.02 15:36 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh
2 issues framed by the court
Whether FIR under Sections 323, 324, 447, 427, 148, 149 IPC can be quashed under inherent powers upon compromise.
Whether continuation of criminal proceedings amounts to abuse of process of law despite settlement.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Kulwinder Singh and others vs. State of PunjabRelied on¶21
Kulwinder Singh and others vs. State of Punjab, 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052
Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab and anotherExplained¶23
Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab and another 2012 (4) RCR (Crl.) 543
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Bhupinder Singh and others
State of Punjab
Sabina
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
