Allowed

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

Punjab & Haryana HC21 Apr 2014CRM-M/36980/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Punjab & Haryana allowed a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash an FIR for offences under Sections 341, 324, 323 read with Section 34 and added Section 326 IPC. Relying on the principle that inherent powers allow quashing even non-compoundable offences if a genuine compromise exists, the Court quashed the FIR as the parties wish to live peacefully.

What did the court decide?

The impugned FIR No.184 dated 08.10.2013 and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom against the present petitioners were quashed.

Hakam Singh and Ors. Vs State of Punjab and Anr. — Quashing and FIR | Punjab & Haryana HC (2014)

¶1

CRM-M No.36980 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-36980 of 2013 (O&M)

¶6

Hakam Singh and others

¶7

.. Petitioners

¶8

Versus

¶9

State of Punjab and another

¶10

.. Respondents

¶11

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURINDER GUPTA

¶12

Present: Mr. Sherry K. Singla, Advocate for the petitioners.

¶13

Ms. Shivali, Asstt. AG, Punjab.

¶14

None for respondent No.2 despite service.

¶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.184 dated 08.10.2013 (Annexure P-1), registered for offences punishable under Sections 341, 324, 323 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code (for short 'IPC') (Section 326 IPC added later on vide rapat No.24 dated 13.10.2013 at Police Station Raman, 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 07.10.2013 all the petitioners in furtherance of their common intention wrongfully restrained complainant Thana Singh-respondent No.2 and voluntarily caused simple and grievous Mehta Sachin injuries with blunt as well as sharp edged weapons. Initially the FIR was 2014.04.25 18:13 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CHANDIGARH

¶18

CRM-M No.36980 of 2013

¶19

-2-

¶20

lodged against the petitioners for offences punishable under Sections 341, 324, 323 read with Section 34 IPC, however, on receipt of x-ray report, the offence punishable under Section 326 IPC was added later on.

¶21

Upon notice, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab has put in appearance on behalf of respondent No.1-State. However, none has put in appearance on behalf of respondent No.2 despite service.

¶22

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case file.

¶23

The parties were directed to appear before the trial court and get their statements recorded. The trial court has sent its report dated 06.01.2014 stating therein that the compromise has been effected in between the complainant (injured) and the accused which appears to be voluntary in nature and without any pressure or influence.

¶24

Learned State counsel has also not disputed compromise (Annexure P-2).

¶25

The only obstacle in the way of accepting the compromise for quashing the impugned FIR is that the offences punishable under Sections 324 and 326 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.

¶26

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

¶27

Mehta Sachin 2014.04.25 18:13 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CHANDIGARH

¶28

CRM-M No.36980 of 2013

¶29

-3-

¶30

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.

¶31

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.

¶32

April 21, 2014 Sachin M.

¶33

(SURINDER GUPTA) JUDGE

¶34

Mehta Sachin 2014.04.25 18:13 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CHANDIGARH

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hakam 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

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.

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