231 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M No.37621 of 2014 (O&M) Date of Decision: 15.09.2015 [ENTITY] and others Petitioners Vs. [ENTITY] and others Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE [ENTITY] Present: Mr. [ENTITY], Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. [ENTITY], Assistant Advocate General, Punjab for respondent No.1/State along with ASI [ENTITY]. Mr. [ENTITY], Advocate for respondent Nos.2 to 6. [ENTITY], J. (Oral)
Present petition under [SECTION] [ACT] is for quashing of FIR No.135 dated 06.06.2014, under [SECTION], [SECTION], [SECTION], [SECTION] and [SECTION] of [ACT], registered with Police Station Bhikhiwind, District Tarn Taran (Annexure P-1) as well as cross-version DDR No.16 dated 07.06.2014 (Annexure P-2) and the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise dated 12.07.2014 and affidavit dated 01.08.2014 of the complainant (Annexure P-3 and P-4 respectively) arrived at between the parties.
As per allegations in the FIR, on 02.06.2014, when complainant- [ENTITY] (respondent No. 2) along with his friend-[ENTITY] (respondent No. 3) was going in a Skoda Car, then a Bolero Jeep bearing registration No. PB-11-AS-6680, stopped the car, in which the petitioners/accused along with 3-4 unknown persons, armed with pistol, baseball bat, datar, hockey stick, respectively, waylaid the complainant party while raising lalkara given by petitioner No. 1-[ENTITY] and inflicted several injuries on the complainant party.
Vide order dated 04.11.2014, this Court directed the learned Illaqa Magistrate/trial Court to send report with regard to compromise in pursuance of which, a report/letter dated 27.01.2015 has been received from the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Tarn Taran, which is taken on record as Mark-A. Learned State Counsel, on instructions from ASI [ENTITY], states that matter is still under investigation.
Hon'ble Supreme Court in [PRECEDENT], [PRECEDENT] has made it explicitly clear in para 15 of its judgment that the High Court in exercise of its inherent powers can quash criminal proceedings or FIR or complaint and [SECTION] of the Code does not limit or effect the powers under [SECTION] of the Code.
A Full Bench of this Court in Kulwinder Singh and others v. [ENTITY] and another, 2007(3) RCR (Criminal) 1052 has held that this Court, in appropriate cases, while exercising powers under [SECTION] [ACT], may quash an FIR disclosing the commission of non compoundable offences. The relevant extracts read as under:-
" The only inevitable conclusion from the above discussion is that there is no statutory bar under the [ACT], which can affect the inherent power of this Court under [SECTION]. Further, the same cannot be limited to matrimonial cases alone and the Court has the wide power to quash the proceedings even in non-compoundable offences notwithstanding the bar under [SECTION] of the [ACT], in order to prevent the abuse of law and to secure the ends of justice. "
Hon'ble Apex Court in another case in [PRECEDENT], [PRECEDENT] while relying upon its decision in [ENTITY]'s case (supra) has also held that in view of the compromise arrived at between the parties, the technicalities should not be allowed to stand in the way in the quashing of criminal proceedings and the continuance of the same after compromise between the parties would be a futile exercise.
Similar views were expressed by Hon'ble the Apex Court in Madan Mohan Abot v. [ENTITY], 2008(4) SCC 582, the relevant extract of which is as under:-
" We need to emphasise that it is perhaps advisable that in disputes where the question involved is of a purely personal nature, the court should ordinarily accept the terms of the compromise even in criminal proceedings as keeping the matter alive with no possibility of a result in favour of the prosecution is a luxury which the courts, grossly overburdened as they are, cannot afford and that the time so saved can be utilised in deciding more effective and meaningful litigation. This is a common sense approach to the matter based on ground of realities and bereft of the technicalities of the law."
Keeping in view the above settled legal position and taking into account the fact that both the parties have desired to live in peace and harmony and carry on with their lives without any ill will or rancour by resolving their differences and entering into the aforesaid compromise, it is evident that it is a fit case where there is no impediment in the way of the Court to exercise its inherent powers under [SECTION] [ACT], for quashing of the FIR in the interest of justice.
Accordingly, the present petition is allowed. The aforementioned FIR along with its cross-version and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom, are quashed.
September 15, 2015 ([ENTITY]) [ENTITY] JUDGE