Allowed

Mohan Singh v. State of Punjab and Another

Punjab & Haryana HC1 May 2024CRM-M/11061/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a petition under Section 482 CrPC to quash an FIR under Sections 498-A and 323 IPC. The court found that a compromise deed was genuine and voluntary, supported by a magistrate's report, necessitating the quashing of proceedings to secure the ends of justice between the parties.

What did the court decide?

FIR No.0056 dated 02.05.2023 under Sections 498-A and 323 IPC and all consequential proceedings quashed qua the petitioner.

Mohan Singh Vs State of Punjab and Another — Matrimonial and Divorce | Punjab & Haryana HC (2024)

¶1

2024:PHHC:059988

¶2

216

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

CRM-M No.11061 of 2024 Date of order: 01.05.2024

¶5

Mohan Singh ….Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State of Punjab and another ....Respondent

¶8

CORAM: HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA

¶9

Present:Mr. Arvind Kashyap, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Aakanksha Gupta, AAG, Punjab. Mr. Kamaljeet Yadav, Advocate for respondent No.2.

¶10

¶11

Nidhi Gupta, J. (Oral)

¶12

Prayer in the present petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is for quashing of FIR No.0056 dated 02.05.2023 under Sections 498-A and 323 IPC registered at Police Station Amloh, District Fatehgarh Sahib (PB) (Annexure P/1) and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise deed dated 24.08.2023 (Annexure P-2) arrived at between the parties.

¶13

Vide order dated 01.03.2024, a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court had directed the parties to appear before the trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate for getting their statements recorded with regard to the compromise deed dated 24.08.2023 (Annexure P-2).

¶14

In terms of the order dated 01.03.2024 passed by this Court, parties have appeared before the Court of learned Civil Judge (Jr. Div.)-cumJudicial Magistrate Ist Class, Amloh to get their statements recorded. Learned Civil Judge (Jr. Div.)-cum-Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Amloh has

¶15

AMIT KHANCHI 2024.05.02 10:37 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order

¶16

2024:PHHC:059988

¶17

CRM-M No.11061 of 2024

¶18

[2]

¶19

submitted his report dated 02.04.2024 along with the statements of the parties, which was duly forwarded by the learned District & Sessions Judge, Fatehgarh Sahib to this Court.

¶20

A perusal of the above said report would show that the parties (i.e. petitioner and respondent No.2) have appeared and suffered their statements with respect to the compromise, which have been found to be voluntary, genuine, and without any coercion or undue influence.

¶21

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as per the report, the compromise that has been effected between the parties is genuine, voluntary and without any pressure/coercion or undue influence. Learned counsel further states that as per the report, neither the petitioner is involved in any other criminal case nor is he declared a proclaimed offender in the present case.

¶22

Learned State counsel states that she has no objection in case the FIR is quashed on the basis of compromise deed dated 24.08.2023 (Annexure P-2) qua the petitioner.

¶23

Learned counsel for respondent No.2 has again reiterated that the matter has been settled and the said compromise is in the interest of all the persons and would help in bringing out peace and amity between the parties. This Court has heard learned counsel for the parties and has perused the file.

¶24

After perusing the report submitted by the learned Civil Judge (Jr. Div.)-cum-Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Amloh, this Court finds that the matter has been amicably settled between the petitioner and respondent No.2. Since the matter has been settled and the parties have decided to live in peace, this Court feels that in order to secure the ends of justice, the criminal

¶25

AMIT KHANCHI 2024.05.02 10:37 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order

¶26

2024:PHHC:059988

¶27

CRM-M No.11061 of 2024

¶28

[3]

¶29

proceedings deserve to be quashed.

¶30

As per the Full Bench judgment of this Court in “Kulwinder Singh and others Vs State of Punjab”, 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052, it is held that High Court has power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to allow the compounding of non-compoundable offence and quash the proceedings where the High Court is of the opinion that the same is required to prevent the abuse of the process of law or otherwise to secure the ends of justice. This power of quashing is not confined to matrimonial disputes alone.

¶31

Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of “Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab and another”, 2012 (4) RCR (Criminal) 543 , had also observed that in order to secure the ends of justice or to prevent the abuse of process of Court, inherent power can be used by this Court to quash criminal proceedings in which a compromise has been effected. The relevant portion of para 57 of the said judgment is reproduced hereinbelow:-

¶32

“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.”

¶33

AMIT KHANCHI 2024.05.02 10:37 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order

¶34

2024:PHHC:059988

¶35

CRM-M No.11061 of 2024

¶36

[4]

¶37

In view of what has been discussed hereinabove, the present petition is allowed and FIR No.0056 dated 02.05.2023 under Sections 498-A and 323 IPC registered at Police Station Amloh, District Fatehgarh Sahib (PB) (Annexure P/1) along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise deed dated 24.08.2023 (Annexure P-2) are ordered to be quashed qua the petitioner.

¶38

(Nidhi Gupta) Judge

¶39

01.05.2024

¶40

‘Amit’

¶41

Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No

¶42

AMIT KHANCHI 2024.05.02 10:37 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order

Mohan Singh v. State of Punjab and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohan Singh v. State of Punjab and Another

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

Subeg Singh Vs State of Punjab

Sukhrajdeep Singh and Others Vs State of Punjab and Another

Sandeep Sangwan Vs Monika

Angrej Singh @ Kallu Vs State of Punjab

Renu Vs State of Punjab

Lavish Sharma Vs State of Punjab and Anr.