[CASE NUMBER] 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH [CASE NUMBER] Date of Decision:April 16, 2018 [ENTITY] Petitioner Versus [ENTITY] and another Respondents CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE [ENTITY] Present: Mr.[ENTITY],Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.[ENTITY], Deputy Advocate General,Haryana Mr.[ENTITY], Advocate for respondent No.2 [ENTITY], J.
Petitioner has filed the present petition under [SECTION] of the [ACT] for quashing of FIR No. 139 dated 24.7.2014 under [SECTION], [SECTION] read with [SECTION] of the [ACT] (`[ACT]' for short) registered at Police Station Garhi, Tehsil Narwana, District Jind (Annexure P1) and order dated 8.4.2016 (Annexure P2) all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise dated 25.11.2017 (Annexure P3) .
Vide order dated 1.2.2018, a direction was given to the trial Court to record the statements of the parties and submit a report regarding the genuineness of the compromise effected between the parties and also to intimate whether any accused is proclaimed offender.
1 of 4 In pursuance thereof, the trial Court has submitted a report on 20.2.2018 (forwarded by the District and Sessions Judge Jind dated 22.2.2018), after recording the statements of the parties. The trial Court has submitted that the complainant-[ENTITY] and accused-[ENTITY] have appeared along with their respective counsel, who had identified them and got their statements recorded acknowledging that the compromise had been effected voluntarily, without any coercion or any undue influence. The trial Court has further submitted that there were two accused in the said FIR, out of which accused-Harbans@ [ENTITY] had already been acquitted by the trial Court vide order dated 16.11.2016. This fact is not disputed by learned State Counsel,who has submitted on instructions from Assistant Sub Inspector-[ENTITY] that petitioner-accused-[ENTITY] is not declared as a proclaimed offender and the accused-[ENTITY],as per the direction of this Court, has deposited ` 10,000/- as costs before the District Legal Service Authority, Narwana and has been released on interim bail by the trial Court vide order dated 5.2.2018.
Perusal of allegations in the FIR reveals that the present case squarely falls in the category of cases that can be quashed by the High Court, in exercise of its inherent power under [SECTION] of the Code. Keeping in view authoritative enunciation of law laid down by Hon'ble the Supreme Court of India in "[PRECEDENT] and in the light of facts and circumstances of the present case, this Court is of the considered opinion that continuation of criminal proceedings would amount to abuse of process of law and it is expedient in the interest of justice that criminal proceedings are put to an 2 of 4 end.
As per the Full Bench judgement of this Court in [PRECEDENT], High Court has power under [SECTION] [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.
The Apex Court in [PRECEDENT] has held as under:-
"Having carefully considered the singular facts and circumstances of the present case, and also the law relating to the continuance of criminal cases where the complainant and the accused had settled their differences and had arrived at an amicable arrangement, we see no reason to differ with the view taken in [PRECEDENT]'s case (supra) and several decisions of this Court delivered thereafter with respect to the doctrine of judicial restraint. In concluding hereinabove, we are not unmindful of the view recorded in the decisions cited at the Bar that depending on the attendant facts, continuance of the criminal proceedings, after a compromise has been arrived at between the complainant and the accused, would amount to abuse of process of Court and an exercise in futility since the trial would be prolonged and ultimately, it may end in a decision which may be of no consequence to any of the parties."
3 of 4 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. 139 dated 24.7.2014 under [SECTION], [SECTION] read with [SECTION] [ACT] registered at Police Station Garhi, Tehsil Narwana, District Jind (Annexure P1) and the order dated 8.4.2016 (Annexure P2) declaring petitioner a proclaimed offender alongwith all the consequential proceedings, arising therefrom, are ordered to be quashed.
([ENTITY]) JUDGE April 16, 2018 arya Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether Reportable:Yes/No 4 of 4