[CASE NUMBER] -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH [CASE NUMBER] Date of decision : 11.09.2012 [ENTITY] Petitioner Versus [ENTITY] and another Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR Present: Mr. [ENTITY], Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. [ENTITY], Assistant Advocate General, Haryana for respondent No.1. Mr. [ENTITY], Advocate for respondent No.2. [ENTITY], J. (Oral)
Tersely the facts and material, culminating in the commencement, relevant for disposal of the instant petition and emanating from the record, is that, in the wake of complaint of complainant [ENTITY] son of [ENTITY] respondent No.2 (for brevity "the complainant"), a criminal case was registered against the petitioner-accused, vide FIR No.40 dated 20.03.2012 (Annexure P-1), for the commission of offences punishable under [SECTION], [SECTION] and [SECTION] [ACT], by the police of Police Station Bilaspur, District Yamuna Nagar.
2. During the course of investigation, good sense prevailed and the parties have amicably settled their disputes, by virtue of compromise/affidavit dated 05.06.2012 (Annexure P-2) of the complainant.
3. Having compromised the matter, now the petitioner-accused has preferred the instant petition, to quash the impugned FIR (Annexure P-1) and all other subsequent proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise/affidavit (Annexure P-2), invoking the provisions of [SECTION] [ACT], inter-alia, pleading that with the intervention of respectable persons the parties have amicably settled their disputes by way of compromise/affidavit of complainant (Annexure P-2). They have decided not to pursue/file any civil or criminal proceedings against each other, pertaining to the present occurrence, with their free own will and without any kind of pressure. They want to live in peace. On the strength of aforesaid grounds, the petitioner sought to quash the FIR (Annexure P-1) and all other subsequent proceedings arising therefrom, in the manner depicted hereinabove.
4. During the course of preliminary hearing, the trial Court was directed to record the statements of all the concerned parties with regard to the genuineness and validity or otherwise of the compromise/affidavit (Annexure P-2) between them, by this court, by means of order dated 05.07.2012.
5. In pursuance thereof, the Magistrate sent his report bearing No.448 dated 08.08.2012, which in substance is as under: -
"Today i.e. on 7.8.2012, complainant [ENTITY] appeared and his statement has been recorded, wherein he has stated that on 19.3.2012, he was working on the post of Block Education Officer, Bilaspur. On that day, a dispute arose with the accused [ENTITY] and FIR No. 40 dated 20.3.2012, under [SECTION], [SECTION], [SECTION] [ACT] was got registered by him against [ENTITY]. Now, with the intervention of respetables, matter has been compromised between them. They have no grudges against each other. Regarding this, an affidavit has been filed by him before the Hon'ble High Court. He further stated that now he does not want to proceed against the accused [ENTITY].
He has further stated that statement has been given by him voluntarily without any pressure.
Statement of accused [ENTITY] has also been recorded to the effect that a dispute arose between him and the complainant [ENTITY] on 19.3.2012. Now, with the intervention of respectables, matter has been compromised between them. They have no grudges against each other. He further stated that statement has been given by him voluntarily without any pressure.
In view of statements made by the parties, I am satisfied that parties have amicably settled their dispute regarding which an affidavit has also been filed by the complainant before the Hon'ble Punjab and Haryana High Court as stated by him in his statement."
6. In this manner, it stands proved on record that the parties have amicably settled their disputes, vide compromise/affidavit (Annexure P-2). The factum of compromise/affidavit is also reiterated in the indicated report of the trial Court.
7. Above being the position on record, now the short and significant question, though important, that arises for determination in the instant case is, as to whether the present criminal prosecution against the petitioner deserves to be quashed in view of the compromise or not ?
8. Having regard to the contentions of learned counsel for parties, to my mind, it would be in the interest and justice would be sub-served, if the parties are allowed to compromise the matter. Moreover, learned counsel are ad idem that in view of the settlement of disputes between the parties, the present petition deserves to be accepted in this respect.
9. What cannot possibly be disputed here is that, the law with regard to quashing such criminal prosecution on the basis of settlement between the parties, by virtue of compromise, has now been well-settled by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in cases Shiji @ Pappu and others v. Radhika and another, 2012(1) RCR (Criminal) 9; [PRECEDENT]; B.S.Joshi v. [ENTITY] 2003 (2) RCR (Crl.) 888 (SC) and Full Bench of this Court in case [PRECEDENT], wherein it was ruled that the High Court has vast inherent power to quash the criminal prosecution on the basis of settlement of disputes between the parties.
10. The epitome of the law laid down in the indicated judgments is that the power under [SECTION] [ACT] has no limits. However, the High Court will exercise it sparingly and with utmost care and caution. The Court is a vital and an extra-ordinary effective instrument to maintain and control social order. The Courts play role of paramount importance in achieving peace, harmony and ever- lasting congeniality in society and resolution of a dispute by means of a compromise between two warring groups, therefore, should attract the immediate and prompt attention of a Court which should endeavour to give full effect to the same, unless such compromise is abhorrent to lawful composition of the society or would promote savagery, if the statement is fair being free from under pressure. Meaning thereby, the High Court has unlimited power to quash the criminal proceedings, relatable to such cases, on the basis of lawful settlement. The law laid down in the aforesaid judgments "mutatis mutandis" is applicable in the instant case and is the complete answer to the problem in hand.
11. As is evident from the record that with the intervention of respectable persons the parties have amicably settled their disputes by way of compromise/affidavit of complainant (Annexure P-2). They have decided not to pursue/file any civil or criminal proceedings against each other, pertaining to the present occurrence, with their free own will and without any kind of pressure. They want to live in peace. The complainant [ENTITY] (respondent No.2) has no objection if the FIR (Annexure P-1) registered against the petitioner-accused is quashed. The factum and genuineness of the compromise between the parties is also reiterated by the Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, in his indicated report. Thus, it would be seen that since, the compromise is in the welfare and interest of the parties, so, there is no impediment in translating their wishes into reality and to quash the criminal prosecution to set the matter at rest, to enable them to live in peace and to enjoy the life and liberty in a dignified manner. Therefore, to me, the impugned FIR (Annexure P-1) and all other subsequent proceedings arising therefrom, deserve to be quashed in this context.
12. In the light of the aforesaid reasons, the present petition is hereby accepted. Consequently, the impugned FIR No.40 dated 20.03.2012 (Annexure P-1) and all other subsequent proceedings arising therefrom, are quashed and the petitioner-accused is accordingly discharged, from the indicated criminal case in the obtaining circumstances of the case.
September 11, 2012 ([ENTITY]) naresh.k Judge