Allowed

Sukhvir Singh and Another v. State of Punjab and Another

Punjab & Haryana HC13 Sept 2024CRM-M/35315/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Accused sought quashing of FIR under Sections 323, 325, 427 and 34 IPC based on a compromise with the complainant and victims. The Magistrate verified the genuineness and free consent behind the settlement. Holding all offences compoundable under Section 320 CrPC, the High Court quashed the FIR and consequential proceedings.

What did the court decide?

FIR No. 92 dated 22.06.2021, PS City Morinda, and all consequential proceedings quashed; bail bonds discharged; pending applications closed.

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

¶1

CRM-M-35315-2024 (O&M)

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶3

CRM-M-35315-2024 (O&M)

¶4

Reserved on: 04.09.2024

¶5

Date of Pronouncement: 13.09.2024

¶6

Sukhvir Singh and another

¶7

... Petitioner(s)

¶8

Versus

¶9

State of Punjab and another

¶10

…Respondent (s)

¶11

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA

¶12

Present:Mr. Balwant Singh, Advocate for the petitioners.

¶13

Mr. Aashish Bishnoi, DAG, Haryana.

¶14

Mr. Baljinder Singh Singhvi, Advocate for respondent No.2.

¶15

¶16

ANOOP CHITKARA, J.

¶17

FIR No.	Dated	Police Station		Sections
92	22.06.2021	City Morinda, Roopnagar	District	323, 325, 427 & 34 IPC

¶18

The petitioners, arraigned as accused in the above captioned FIR, have come up before

¶19

this Court under Section 482 CrPC for quashing of the FIR and all consequential proceedings based on the compromise with the aggrieved persons.

¶20

During the pendency of the criminal proceedings, the accused and the aggrieved person(s) have compromised the matter, and its copy is annexed with this petition as Annexure P-2.

¶21

After that, the petitioners came up before this Court to quash the FIR, impleading the aggrieved persons as respondent no.2.

¶22

Pursuant to order of this Court dated 31.07.2024, the aggrieved person(s) (Respondent no.2), appeared before the Civil Judge(Junior Divsion)-cum-Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Rupnagar and stated that there would be no objection if the Court quashes this FIR and consequent proceedings. The relevant extract of the report of the concerned Court reads as follows:

¶23

Name of the reporting Judicial Magistrate First Class, Rupnagar UIC No.-PB0611 Court

¶24

ASHWANI KUMAR 2024.09.13 15:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment Punjab & Haryana High Court, Chandigarh

¶25

¶26

CRM-M-35315-2024 (O&M)

¶27

Cri bef	minal Case no. ore trial Court CHI-84-2022
1.	Names of the complainant/ victims(s)/ aggrieved persons(s)	There is one complainant Amrik Singh and five victims namely Surinder Singh, Chanpreet Kaur, Kulwinder Kaur, Manjit Singh and Manpreet Singh
2.	Dates on which the statement(s) of the complainant/ victims(s)/ aggrieved persons(s) were recorded	Joint Statement of Surinder Singh, Kulwinder Kaur, Manpreet Singh and Chanpreet Kaur was recorded on 13.08.2024 and statement of Manjit Singh was recorded on 16.08.2024.
3.	Has the identity of the complainant/ victims(s)/ aggrieved persons(s) been verified?	Yes
4.	Whether all the victims/ all the aggrieved persons have compromised the matter?	Yes
5.	Is there pressure, threat, or coercion upon the victim(s)/aggrieved person(s)/complainant?	No
6.	Names of the accusedperson(s)	Sukhvir Singh and Jasbir Singh.
7.	Dates on which the statement(s) of the accusedpersons(s)recorded	13.08.2024
8.	Whether all the accused have compromised the matter? If no, then the names of the accused who have compromised.	Yes
9.	Whether proclamation proceedings arependingagainst anyaccused?	No
10.	Has the police report been filed or not?	Yes
11.	Notice of accusation /Charges have been framed or not?	No.
12.	Sections of statutes invoked in the matter	323, 324, 427 and 34 IPC
13.	Whether the court is satisfied with the genuineness of the compromise?	Yes

¶28

ANALYSIS & REASONING:

¶29

Despite the severe opposition of the State’s counsel to this compromise, the following aspects would be relevant to conclude this petition: -

¶30

a) The accused and the private respondent have amicably settled the matter between them in terms of the compromise deed and the statements recorded before the concerned Court;

¶31

b) A perusal of the documents reveal that the settlement has not been secured through coercion, threats, social boycotts, bribes, or other dubious means;

¶32

c) The aggrieved person has willingly consented to the nullification of criminal proceedings;

¶33

ASHWANI KUMAR 2024.09.13 15:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment Punjab & Haryana High Court, Chandigarh

¶34

¶35

CRM-M-35315-2024 (O&M)

¶36

d) There is no objection from the private respondent in case present FIR and consequent proceedings are quashed;

¶37

e) In the given facts, the occurrence does not affect public peace or tranquillity, moral turpitude or harm the social and moral fabric of the society or involve matters concerning public policy;

¶38

f) The rejection of compromise may also lead to ill will. The pendency of trial affects career and happiness;

¶39

g) There is nothing on the record to prima facie consider the accused as an unscrupulous, incorrigible, or professional offender; h) The purpose of criminal jurisprudence is reformatory in nature and to work to bring peace to family, community, and society;

¶40

i) The exercise of the inherent power for quashing FIR and all consequential proceedings is justified to secure the ends of justice.

¶41

In the present case, all the offences are compoundable under Section 320 CrPC. Given the legislative mandate, the prosecution can be closed by quashing the FIR and consequent proceedings.

¶42

In Shakuntala Sawhney v Kaushalya Sawhney, (1979) 3 SCR 639 , at P 642, Hon’ble Supreme Court observed that the finest hour of Justice arises propitiously when parties, who fell apart, bury the hatchet and weave a sense of fellowship or reunion.

¶43

In the light of the judicial precedents referred to above, given the terms of compromise, placement of parties, and other factors peculiar to the case, the contents of the compromise deed and its objectives point towards its acceptance.

¶44

In Himachal Pradesh Cricket Association v State of Himachal Pradesh, 2018:INSC:1039 [Para 47], 2018 (4) Crimes 324 , Hon’ble Supreme Court holds “[47]. As far as Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 135 of 2017 is concerned, the appellants came to this Court challenging the order of cognizance only because of the reason that matter was already pending as the appellants had filed the Special Leave Petitions against the order of the High Court rejecting their petition for quashing of the FIR/Chargesheet. Having regard to these peculiar facts, writ petition has also been entertained. In any case, once we hold that FIR needs to be quashed, order of cognizance would automatically stand vitiated.”

¶45

Considering the entire facts, compromise, and in the light of the abovementioned judicial precedents, I believe that continuing these proceedings will not suffice any fruitful purpose whatsoever. In the facts and circumstances peculiar to this

¶46

ASHWANI KUMAR 2024.09.13 15:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment Punjab & Haryana High Court, Chandigarh

¶47

¶48

CRM-M-35315-2024 (O&M)

¶49

case, the Court invokes the inherent jurisdiction under section 482 CrPC and quashes the FIR and all subsequent proceedings qua the petitioner(s). The bail bonds of the petitioner(s) are accordingly discharged. All pending application(s), if any, stand closed.

¶50

Petition allowed in the terms mentioned above .

¶51

(ANOOP CHITKARA) JUDGE September ��2024 AK Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes Whether reportable : No

¶52

ASHWANI KUMAR 2024.09.13 15:16 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment Punjab & Haryana High Court, Chandigarh

¶53

Sukhvir Singh and Another v. State of Punjab and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sukhvir Singh and Another 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

Anuradha and Anr. Vs State of Punjab and Others

Ishwar Vs the State of Punjab and Others

Rajat Bhatia Vs Jatin Chawla

Manju and Another Vs State of Ut Chandigarh and Others

Kulwant Singh @ Vadda @ Kulwant Singh Wada Vs State of Punjab

Avtar Singh Vs State of Punjab