Allowed

Amardeep Singh v. State of Punjab and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC23 May 2018CRM-M/16694/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This single-judge bench allowed a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing an FIR based on a voluntary compromise between the petitioner and the complainant. The court found the compromise genuine, recorded by a judicial officer, and in the interest of social harmony.

What did the court decide?

FIR No. 241 dated 26.10.2012 and all ancillary proceedings are quashed.

Amardeep Singh Vs State of Pun… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Punjab & Haryana HC (2018)

¶1

CRM-M No. 16694 of 2017 -1-

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶3

CRM-M No. 16694 of 2017 (O&M) Date of decision : 23.5.2018

¶4

Amardeep Singh @ Laddi

¶5

................Petitioner

¶6

vs.

¶7

State of Punjab and others

¶8

.................Respondents

¶9

Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice H. S. Madaan

¶10

Present: Mr. Deepak Aggarwal, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶11

Mr. Rakeshinder Singh Sidhu, AAG, Punjab.

¶12

Mr. Nipun Gupta, Advocate for

¶13

Mr. Sandeep Sharma, Advocate for respondent No.2.

¶14

H. S. Madaan, J. (Oral)

¶15

Petitioner – Amardeep Singh @ Laddi has brought the instant petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of FIR No. 241 dated 26.10.2012, for offences under Sections 365, 367, 506, 323, 34 IPC, registered at Police Station Civil Lines, Bathinda, against him, alongwith consequential proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise, stated to have been effected between him and complainant Jagmeet Singh - arrayed as respondent No.2 .

¶16

When the petition came up for hearing on 11.5.2017, notice of motion was ordered to be issued. The respondent No. 1 - State of

¶17

Banita Chugh 2018.05.24 15:29 I am the author of this document

¶18

CRM-M No. 16694 of 2017 -2-

¶19

Punjab through State counsel, whereas respondent No.2 through Mr. Sandeep Sharma, Advocate, had put in appearance. Then in light of the contention that parties have since effected compromise, they were directed to put in appearance before the Illaqa Magistrate to get their statements recorded with regard to compromise and the Illaqa Magistrate was directed to send a report to this Court.

¶20

Report has been received from Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bathinda, in terms of which complainant Jagmeet Singh and accused, namely, Amardeep Singh @ Laddi had appeared there and their statements were recorded, in terms of which they have admitted to have entered into a voluntary compromise, with free will, without any pressure, coercion or undue influence. Further complainant has stated that he has no objection if the FIR in question is quashed by this Court. There is nothing on record to doubt the genuineness of the compromise so arrived at between the parties. It has been reported that no accused has been declared proclaimed offender in the FIR in question. Alongwith the report copies of statements of the complainant and the accused-petitioner, have been annexed.

¶21

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned State counsel, besides going through the record.

¶22

The dispute between the parties has been resolved amicably, which appears to have been arrived at between them voluntarily without any threat or coercion and in terms of ratio of the authority reported as Kulwinder Singh and others vs. State of Punjab and others 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052, where in para 28, it has been Banita Chugh 2018.05.24 15:29 I am the author of this document

¶23

CRM-M No. 16694 of 2017 -3-

¶24

held as under :-

¶25

“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 ”.”

¶26

It has been observed that High Court has power to quash prosecution in order to achieve ends of justice and to prevent abuse of process of law. Though such powers are unlimited but those are to be exercised sparingly and with utmost care and caution. Though there is no statutory bar which can effect the inherent power of High Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

¶27

The compromise is in interest of peace and tranquility in the society and for such like reasons this Court can quash the FIR and ancillary proceedings exercising power under Section 482 Cr.P.C., it appears to be a fit case to exercise such powers.

¶28

Accordingly, the petition is allowed and the abovesaid FIR alongwith ancillary proceedings are hereby quashed, qua petitioner Amardeep Singh @ Laddi only.

¶29

Banita Chugh 2018.05.24 15:29 I am the author of this document

Amardeep Singh v. State of Punjab and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amardeep Singh 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

Karan Gaur Vs State of Punjab etc.

Vijay Vs Ut of Chandigarh

Kuljit Singh Alias Bitta Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Jatinder Kumar and Ors. Vs State of Punjab through Pardeep Kumar

Juhuri and Ors. Vs Pardeep Kumar and Ors.

Surinder Kumar Sharma Vs Karnail Kaur