Allowed

Jit Singh and Others v. State of Punjab and Another

Punjab & Haryana HC8 Nov 2024CRM-M/17805/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This single-judge oral order quashed the summoning order and the order framing charges in a criminal complaint. The court relied on a recorded report by the Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate confirming a genuine, voluntary, and uncompromised settlement between the parties.

What did the court decide?

The summoning order dated 09.10.2018 and the order framing charges dated 21.07.2023 were quashed qua the petitioners.

Jit Singh and Others Vs State of Punjab and Another — Quashing and FIR | Punjab & Haryana HC (2024)

¶1

CRM-M-17805-2024 -1-

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND H ARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶3

219 CR M -M-17805-2024

¶4

Dat e of Decision: 08.11.2024

¶5

Jit Singh a nd others .… Petitioners

¶6

Versus

¶7

State of P u njab and another .... Respondents

¶8

CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA

¶9

Present: - Mr. Yashasvi Kapila, Advoc a te for the petitioners.

¶10

Ms. Aakanksha Gupta, AAG, Punjab.

¶11

Mr. Hitesh Verma, Advocate for Mr. Rudresh Solanki, Advoc a te for respondent No. 2.

¶12

NIDHI GUPTA, J. (ORAL)

¶13

Prayer in this petition filed u n der Section 482 Cr.P.C. is for quashing o f summoning order dated 09. 1 0.2018 (Annexure P-1) passed by the Ju d icial Magistrate Ist Class, Ka p urthala and Complaint bearing No. CO M I/425/2018 dated 25.01.2018 (Annexure P-2) filed under Sections 4 52, 354, 506, 34 IPC; and th e order framing charges dated 21.07.202 3 (Annexure P-3) pending bef o re the Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrat e , Kapurthala, on the basis of compromise dated 18.01.2024 (Annexur e P-4) effected between the parti e s.

¶14

Pursuant to the order dated 1 5 .04.2024 passed by this Court, the partie s have appeared before the l e arned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrat e , Bholath to get their state m ents recorded. Learned Sub Divisiona l Judicial Magistrate, Bholath, h as submitted his report along

¶15

RISHU KATARIA 2024.11.11 19:17 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.

¶16

CRM-M-17805-2024 -2-

¶17

with state m ents of the parties vide letter d a ted 20.05.2024 duly forwarded by the lea r ned District and Sessions Judge , Kapurthala.

¶18

A perusal of the above sai d report would show that the petitioner s and respondent No. 2 have a p peared before the learned trial Court and suffered statements with respec t to the compromise which have been foun d to be genuine, voluntary and w ithout any coercion and undue influence. Petitioner No. 1-Jit Singh and p etitioner No. 2-Jaswinder Kaur are also i n volved in other cases, as men t ioned in para No. 1(iii) of the report of t h e learned trial Court.

¶19

Learned counsel for the peti t ioners , inter alia , submits that petitioner No.1 was having a property d i spute with the husband of the complain a nt/respondent No.2 and it is in that misunderstanding the present co m plaint has been filed. Now bet t er sense has prevailed between the partie s and in order to live peacef u lly, parties have entered into compromise dated 18.01.2024 (Annexure P-4), according to which, both the partie s have agreed not to proceed f u rther with the FIR in question. Further, it is submitted that all the three p etitioners have been named in the compl a int and have never been declar e d as proclaimed offenders.

¶20

Learned State counsel has sta t ed that he has ‘no objection’ in case the F I R is quashed on the basis of co m promise qua the petitioners. This Court has heard the lea r ned counsel for the parties and has perus e d the file.

¶21

After perusing the report submitted by the learned Sub Divisiona l Judicial Magistrate, Bholath, t his Court finds that the matter

¶22

RISHU KATARIA 2024.11.11 19:17 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.

¶23

CRM-M-17805-2024 -3-

¶24

has been a micably settled between the petitioners and respondent No. 2. Since the matter has been settled and the parties have decided to live in peace, thi s Court feels that in order to s ecure the ends of justice, the criminal p r oceedings deserve to be quashed.

¶25

As per the Full Bench judgm e nt of this Court in “Kulwinder Singh and others Vs State of Punjab”, 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052, it is held th a t High Court has power under S ection 482 Cr.P.C. to allow the compoun d ing of non-compoundable offe n ce and quash the proceedings where the High Court is of the opinio n that the same is required to prevent th e abuse of the process of law or otherwise to secure the ends of justice. T h is power of quashing is not c o nfined to matrimonial disputes alone.

¶26

Hon'ble Apex Court in the c a se of “Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab and another”, 2012 (4) RCR (Criminal) 543, had also observed that in or d er to secure the ends of just i ce or to prevent the abuse of process o f Court, inherent power can b e used by this Court to quash criminal p roceedings in which a compromise has been effected. The relevant portion of para 57 of the said j u dgment is reproduced here-in-

¶27

below:-

¶28

“57. The position that emer g es from the above discussion can be summarised thus: th e power of the High Court in quashing a criminal proce e ding or FIR or complaint in exercise of its inherent juris d iction is distinct and different from the power given to a c r iminal court for compounding the offences under Section 3 2 0 of the Code. Inherent power is of wide plenitude with no s tatutory limitation but it has to be exercised in accord with t he guideline engrafted in such power viz; (i) to secure the e nds of justice or (ii) to prevent

¶29

RISHU KATARIA 2024.11.11 19:17 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.

¶30

CRM-M-17805-2024 -4-

¶31

abuse of the process of any C o urt.”

¶32

In view of what has been discussed here-in-above, this petition is allowed and summoning ord e r dated 09.10.2018 (Annexure P-1) passed by the Judicial Magistra t e Ist Class, Kapurthala and Complain t bearing No. COMI/425/2018 d ated 25.01.2018 (Annexure P- 2) filed u n der Sections 452, 354, 506, 3 4 IPC; and the order framing charges d ated 21.07.2023 (Annexure P -3) pending before the Sub Divisiona l Judicial Magistrate, Kapurthala, on the basis of compromise dated 18. 0 1.2024 (Annexure P-4) effe c ted between the parties, are ordered to be quashed qua the petitioners.

¶33

08.11.2024 ( NIDHI GUPTA ) rishu JUDGE

¶34

Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No

¶35

RISHU KATARIA 2024.11.11 19:17 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.

Jit Singh and Others v. State of Punjab and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jit Singh and Others 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

Krishan Arora Vs State of Punjab

Kulwant Kaur Vs Gursahib Singh and Ors.

P Vs State of Haryana and Others

Neeraj Manchanda Vs Latika Manchanda and Anr.

Gurpreet Singh and Others Vs State of Punjab and Others

Vipin Dhariwal @ Vipin Kumar Vs State of Haryana