[CASE NUMBER] -1- 252 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH [CASE NUMBER] Date of Decision: 15.03.2017 [ENTITY] and others Petitioners Vs [ENTITY] and another Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE [ENTITY] Present: Mr. [ENTITY], Advocate, for the petitioners. Ms. [ENTITY], A.A.G., Punjab. Mr. [ENTITY], Advocate, for respondent No. 2. [ENTITY], J.(Oral)
Learned counsel for the respondents have clarified that respondent No. 2, who was once declared as proclaimed offender has since joined the proceedings and has also been granted bail.
Prayer is for quashing of FIR No. 45 dated 21.09.2015 under [SECTION] and [SECTION] [ACT] registered at Police Station Tibber, District Gurdaspur (Annexure P-1), on the basis of compromise.
On 28.07.2016, this Court directed both the parties to appear before the trial Court for recording of their statements in context of genuineness of the compromise. Both the parties 1 of 3 have appeared before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gurdaspur, on 16.01.2017 and their statements have been recorded by the Magistrate.
In pursuance of said order, Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gurdaspur, after recording statements of the parties, has reported that the compromise effected between the parties is genuine, voluntary and without any undue influence and coercion.
This Court is of the opinion that in view of compromise between the parties, chances of conviction of the accused are remote and there is minimal chance of the witnesses coming forward to depose in support of prosecution version. In view of remote chances of conviction, it would be appropriate to exercise discretionary power of this Court under [SECTION] [ACT] to put an end to the controversy for all times to come. The compromise would facilitate both the parties to live in peace and to maintain public tranquility and offence in question is personal in nature and does not involve any heinous and serious offence of any mental depravity, nor it involves any offence covered under [ACT]. Therefore, when possibility of conviction is remote and bleak, continuation of criminal proceedings would put the accused to oppression and prejudice. In such a situation the exercise of power to 2 of 3 quash the proceedings would be in consonance with the provisions of law to meet ends of justice and to prevent unnecessary continuation of proceedings which may ultimately result in some unnecessary vagaries of criminal trial.
Learned State counsel, however, objects to the aforesaid course, but in order to prevent unnecessary continuation of criminal proceedings on the ground that there are bleak chances of conviction in the case, this Court is of the opinion that it would be in fitness of things to quash the proceedings on the basis of compromise.
The compromise in question is fully in consonance with the guidelines framed in Kulwinder Singh and others vs. [ENTITY], 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052 and Gian Singh vs. [ENTITY] and another 2012 (4) RCR (Crl.)
543. Resultantly, FIR No. 45 dated 21.09.2015 under [SECTION] and [SECTION] [ACT] registered at Police Station Tibber, District Gurdaspur (Annexure P-1) and all the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom, are quashed.
Petition stands disposed of.
15.03.2017 ([ENTITY]) apurva JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No 3 of 3