Allowed

Gurcharan Singh and Ors. v. State of Punjab and Others

Punjab & Haryana HC12 Dec 2024CRM-M/44112/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court quashed an FIR registered under Sections 323, 354, 451, 148, 149 IPC and Section 12 POCSO Act on the ground that the parties had amicably settled the dispute. The compromise was found genuine and voluntary, and quashing was deemed necessary to secure the ends of justice.

What did the court decide?

FIR No. 113 dated 13.10.2020 and all consequential proceedings quashed qua the petitioners.

Gurcharan Singh and Ors. Vs State of… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Punjab & Haryana HC (2024)

¶1

CRM-M-44112-2020 -1-

¶2

IN THE HI G H COURT OF PUNJAB AND H ARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 222-A CR M -M-44112-2020

¶3

Dat e of Decision: 12.12.2024

¶4

Gurcharan Singh and others .… Petitioners

¶5

Versus

¶6

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

¶7

CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA

¶8

Present: - Mr. GS Dhillon, Advocate fo r the petitioners.

¶9

Ms. Aakanksha Gupta, AAG, Punjab.

¶10

Mr. Prabhat Gupta, Advocate for Mr. Dushyant Saharan, Advo c ate for respondents No. 2 and 3.

¶11

NIDHI GUPTA, J. (ORAL)

¶12

Prayer in this petition filed u n der Section 482 Cr.P.C., is for quashing o f FIR No. 113 dated 13.10.2 0 20 (Annexure P-1) registered under Sec t ions 323, 354, 451, 148 and 149 IPC and Section 12 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offen c es Act, 2012 at Police Station Kheri Gan d ian, District Patiala and all co n sequential proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise da t ed 11.11.2020 (Annexure P-3) effected b e tween the parties.

¶13

On the last date of hearing, w h en the present case along with connected case bearing CRM-M-44067- 2 020, was listed for hearing, following o rder was passed by this Court:-

¶14

“Vide order dated 03.08.2023, passed by this Court in CRM-M-44112-2020, petitio n ers No. 2, 3 and 5, namely, Jasvir Singh, Taranjit Singh @ Pashu and Avtar Singh, were directed to appear before t he learned trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate, for recording th e ir statements qua genuineness of compromise.

¶15

RISHU KATARIA 2024.12.17 10:09 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.

¶16

CRM-M-44112-2020 -2-

¶17

Pursuant thereto, rep o rt from the learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Rajpur a , vide letter dated 25.08.2023 (appended with CRM-M-44112-2020), duly forwarded by the learned District and Sessi o ns Judge, Patiala, has been received, wherein it has been reported that petitioners No. 2, 3 and 5, have not appeared b efore the Court for recording their statements regarding th e compromise.

¶18

Learned counsel for th e petitioners (in CRM-M-441122020) regrets for the afore s aid lapse and prays that one more opportunity may be gra n ted for the said purpose. There is no justificatio n to entertain the request made by learned counsel for the pet i tioners however, in the interest of justice, one more opport u nity is granted to petitioners Nos. 2, 3 and 5 (in CRM-M- 4 4112-2020) for recording their statements before the trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate, with regard to the compromise dated 11.11.2020 (Annexure P-3) on 03.09.2024 or any other d ate convenient to the learned trial Court by moving an a ppropriate application or by presenting this order, subject to deposit of ₹10,000/- each as costs (in total ₹30,000/-) with the Punjab and Haryana High Court Lawyer’s Welfare A s sociation Fund, Chandigarh, within a period of one week fr o m today.

¶19

The trial Court/Illaqa M agistrate is directed to submit fresh report on or before t he next date of hearing i.e. 12.12.2024, in terms of order dated 06.12.2022, passed by a co-ordinate Bench of this Co u rt. A copy of the report be sent through FAX, to the Registrar (Judicial) of this Court. A photocopy of this or d er be placed on the file of other connected case.

¶20

Pursuant to the order dated 20.08.2024 reproduced above, a

¶21

consolidat e d report vide letter dated 16.09.2024 (appended with connected petition bearing CRM-M-44067-2020) along with statements of the parties has been received from the learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Rajpura, duly forwarded by the learned District and Sessions Judge, Pat i ala.

¶22

A perusal of the above sai d report would show that the private pa r ties have appeared before the l e arned trial Court and suffered statements with respect to the compromis e which have been found to be genuine, v o luntary and without any coerc i on and undue influence. It has

¶23

RISHU KATARIA 2024.12.17 10:09 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.

¶24

CRM-M-44112-2020

¶25

-3-

¶26

further be e n reported that the costs of Rs. 3 0,000/- in terms of order dated 20.08.202 4 , stands deposited by petitioner s No. 2, 3 and 5, namely; Jasvir Singh, Ta r anjit Singh @ Pashu and A v tar Singh. Simultaneously, a separate r e port in terms of order dated 20.08.2024, from the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, F a st Track Special Court, Patiala, has also b e en received vide letter dated 09 . 10.2024 (appended with CRMM-44112- 2 020), which echoes the same n a rrations as made by the learned Illaqa Ma g istrate, Patiala, in the aforesai d report. It is also pertinent to mention h e re that petitioner No. 7-Roshan L al, has expired.

¶27

Learned counsel for the peti t ioners , inter alia, submits that this is a case of version and cross- v ersion. Both the parties are co-villagers and both, the present main FI R (Annexure P-1) as well as the cross-case registered vide General Dia r y No. 41 dated 14.10.2020 (Annexure P-2) registered under Sections 3 23, 324, 452, 148 and 149 IPC at Police S tation Kheri Gandian, District P atiala (Annexure P-2), are the outcome o f some misunderstanding betwe e n the parties. Now better sense has prevai l ed between the parties and in o rder to live peacefully, parties have ent e red into compromise date d 11.11.2020(Annexure P-3), according to which, both the parties hav e agreed not to proceed further with the a fo resaid FIR as well as the cross - case in question.

¶28

Learned counsel for the Sta t e has stated that she has ‘no objection’ in case the present cross-case ( A nnexure P-1) is quashed on the basis of co m promise qua the petitioners.

¶29

This Court has heard the lear n ed counsel for the parties and has peruse d the file.

¶30

RISHU KATARIA 2024.12.17 10:09 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.

¶31

CRM-M-44112-2020

¶32

-4-

¶33

After perusing the reports s u bmitted by the learned Illaqa Magistrate and the learned trial Court, thi s Court finds that the matter has been amic a bly settled between the petitio n ers and respondents No. 2 and 3. Since the matter has been settled and th e 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 quashe d .

¶34

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 tha t High Court has power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to allow the compound i ng of non-compoundable offe n ce and quash the proceedings where the H igh Court is of the opinion tha t the same is required to prevent the abuse o f the process of law or otherwi s e to secure the ends of justice. This powe r of quashing is not confined to m atrimonial disputes alone.

¶35

Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of “Gian Singh Vs. State of

¶36

Punjab and another”, 2012 (4) RCR (Criminal) 543, had also observed that in or d er to secure the ends of justice or to prevent the abuse of process o f Court, inherent power can b e used by this Court to quash criminal proceedings in which a compr o mise has been effected. The relevant p o rtion of para 57 of the said j u dgment is reproduced here-in-

¶37

below:-

¶38

“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 procee d ing 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 32 0 of the Code. Inherent power is of wide plenitude with no stat u tory limitation but it has to be exercised in accord with th e guideline engrafted in such power viz; (i) to secure the e n ds of justice or (ii) to prevent abuse of the process of any C o urt.”

¶39

RISHU KATARIA 2024.12.17 10:09 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.

¶40

CRM-M-44112-2020

¶41

-5-

¶42

In view of what has been discussed here-in-above, this petition is allowed and FIR No. 113 dat e d 13.10.2020 (Annexure P-1) registered u nder Sections 323, 354, 451, 1 4 8 and 149 IPC and Section 12 of the Pro t ection of Children from Sexua l Offences Act, 2012 at Police Station K h eri Gandian, District Patiala an d all consequential proceedings arising th e refrom, on the basis of c o mpromise dated 11.11.2020 (Annexure P-3) effected between the par t ies, are ordered to be quashed

¶43

qua the pe t itioners.

¶44

12.12.2024 ( NIDHI GUPTA ) rishu JUDGE

¶45

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

¶46

RISHU KATARIA 2024.12.17 10:09 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.

Gurcharan Singh and Ors. v. State of Punjab and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gurcharan Singh and Ors. v. State of Punjab and Others

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

Kamaljeet @ Bhalla Vs State of Punjab

Lakhvir @ Lakhveer Singh Vs State of Punjab

Manjeet Singh Vs State of Punjab

Chandan @ Chandu Vs State of Punjab and Another

Mukta Mahajan Vs Vivek Mahajan

Nitin Vs State of Haryana