[CASE NUMBER] (O&M) -1 - 1- 224 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH [CASE NUMBER] (O&M) Date of Decision: December 03, 2015 [ENTITY] and another Petitioners Versus [ENTITY] and others Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE [ENTITY] Present: Present Mr. [ENTITY], Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. [ENTITY], AAG Punjab. Mr. [ENTITY], Advocate for respondent No.2. Respondent No.3 in person. [ENTITY], J.
Petitioners have filed this petition under [SECTION] of the [ACT] for quashing of FIR No.33 dated 22.02.2011, under [SECTION], [SECTION], [SECTION], [SECTION], [SECTION] of the [ACT] ('[ACT]' for short), registered at Police Station Division No.7 (Vardhman), Ludhiana City, District Ludhiana and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise.
Learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned counsel for respondent No.2 have submitted that parties have amicably settled their dispute.
Vide order dated 15.01.2014, trial Court was directed to record the statements of the parties and send its report with regard to genuineness of the compromise effected between the parties.
[CASE NUMBER] (O&M) -2 - 2-
In pursuance to the said order, respondent No.2 appeared before the trial Court and made the following statement:
"Statement of complaint [ENTITY] w/o Lt. [ENTITY] r/o House No.2744, Sector 32/A Urban Estate, Jamalpur, Ludhiana.
That I have compromise the matter with [ENTITY] and [ENTITY] in this regard we have already executed one compromise deed, the original compromise deed of which placed on record in the Hon'ble High Court. I have seen that compromise deed Ex. DA, in the Court, which bears my signatures. Both the parties, this compromise is binding upon us. I have signed this compromise deed voluntarily without any pressure from any side and out of my own free will. I have no objection if the FIR No.33/11, under Section [SECTION] [ACT], P.S Division no.7, Ludhiana registered against [ENTITY] and [ENTITY] is quashed."
Today, respondent No.3 is present in person and has placed on record the photocopy of her Aadhaar Card. She has admitted the factum of compromised between the parties and has stated that she has no objection, if the FIR in question is ordered to be quashed. She has tendered on record her affidavit in this regard.
Learned State counsel has submitted that after investigation of the case, cancellation report has been prepared on account of compromise between the parties.
As per the Full Bench judgment of this Court in Kulwinder Singh and others vs. [ENTITY], 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052, High Court has power under [SECTION] [CASE NUMBER] (O&M) -3
- 3- [ACT] to allow the compounding of non-compoundable offence and quash the prosecution where the High Court felt that the same was required to prevent the abuse of the process of any Court or to otherwise secure the ends of justice. This power of quashing is not confined to matrimonial disputes alone.
Hon'ble the Apex Court in the case of Gian Singh vs. [ENTITY] and another 2012 (4) RCR (Crl.) 543, 543 has held as under:-
"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] 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. In what cases power to quash the criminal proceeding or complaint or F.I.R may be exercised where the offender and victim have settled their dispute would depend on the facts and circumstances of each case and no category can be prescribed. However, before exercise of such power, the High Court must have due regard to the nature and gravity of the crime. Heinous and serious offences of mental depravity or offences like murder, rape, dacoity, etc. cannot be fittingly quashed even though the victim or victim's family and the offender have settled the dispute. Such offences are not private in nature and have serious impact on society. Similarly, any compromise between the victim and offender in relation to the offences under special statutes like [ACT] or the offences committed by public servants while working in that capacity etc; cannot provide for any basis for quashing criminal proceedings involving such offences. But the criminal cases having overwhelmingly and pre-dominatingly civil flavour stand on different footing for the purposes of quashing, particularly the offences arising from commercial, financial, mercantile, civil, partnership or such like transactions or the offences arising out of matrimony relating to dowry, etc. or the family disputes where the wrong is basically private or personal in nature and the parties have resolved their entire dispute. In this category of [CASE NUMBER] (O&M) -4
- 4- cases, High Court may quash criminal proceedings if in its view, because of the compromise between the offender and victim, the possibility of conviction is remote and bleak and continuation of criminal case would put accused to great oppression and prejudice and extreme injustice would be caused to him by not quashing the criminal case despite full and complete settlement and compromise with the victim. In other words, the High Court must consider whether it would be unfair or contrary to the interest of justice to continue with the criminal proceeding or continuation of the criminal proceeding would tantamount to abuse of process of law despite settlement and compromise between the victim and wrongdoer and whether to secure the ends of justice, it is appropriate that criminal case is put to an end and if the answer to the above question(s) is in affirmative, the High Court shall be well within its jurisdiction to quash the criminal proceeding."
Since the parties have arrived at a compromise and have decided to live in peace, no useful purpose would be served in allowing the criminal proceedings to continue.
Accordingly, this petition is allowed. FIR No.33 dated 22.02.2011, under [SECTION], [SECTION], [SECTION], [SECTION], [SECTION] [ACT], registered at Police Station Division No.7 (Vardhman), Ludhiana City, District Ludhiana and all the consequential proceedings, arising therefrom, are quashed.
([ENTITY]) JUDGE December 03, 2015 mahavir