Crl. Misc. No. M-37030 of 2010 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No. M-37030 of 2010 (O&M) Date of decision : 31.05.2011 Anter Singh @ Attar Singh and another ......Petitioners versus State of Punjab and another ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI Present: Mr. A.S Barnala, Advocate for the petitioners. Sh. Guninder S. Brar, A.A.G., Punjab for respondent No. 1-State **** RITU BAHRI , J. (Oral) The present petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for quashing of FIR No.187 dated 07.07.2010 under Sections 307, 452, 323, 324, 148, 149 of the Indian Penal Code (for short 'the Code') and under Sections 25/27 of the Arms Act, registered at Police Station City Barnala, (Annexure P-1) and all the subsequent proceeding arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise (Annexure P-2). Brief facts of the case are that the above FIR was registered at the instance of respondent No. 2. As per FIR, on 07.07.2010, the Crl. Misc. No. M-37030 of 2010 (O&M) -2- complainant was present at his dhaba along with his father. Thereafter, his maternal uncle Bhagwant Singh along with the complainant's Mami, Surjit Kaur and their son Gagandeep Singh were taking their lunch in a cabin made of glass. Thereafter, one indica car, one white colour safari car and one lancer type of car was coming from Bathinda side and stopped about 75/80 feet away from the counter of the complainant's dhaba. Out of which 14/15 boys alighted, who were having iron rods, lathis and open swords and one person was having 315 bore rifle which was looking like hockey. They started proceeding towards Dhaba then one out of these boys whose name was Atar Singh who was having sword in his hand and the another boy Joney who was having iron rod in his hand raised lalkara that today Jagdev Singh will be taught a lesson for entering into a quarel with them. Thereafter, the unknown person had fired a shot from 315 bore rifle towards the complainant with an intention to kill the complainant. The complainant in order to save himself bent downwards from the counter of Tandoor in the kitchen, due to which the shot passed above from the head of the complainant. Thereafter Anter Singh had given dasti swords blow towards the head of the complainant. Then some unknown persons gave two iron blows on the lower portion of his left leg and one blow on his knee and the above mentioned Sony Crl. Misc. No. M-37030 of 2010 (O&M) -3- was continuing to instigate all these persons that today he should not be left alive. They also gave kick blows to him with their legs. In the above background, FIR was registered against the petitioners. Counsel for the petitioners has placed on record the MLR report of the complainant, which is taken on record as Annexure A-1. As per this report, the injuries are simple in nature. However, during the pendency of the trial, the parties have compromised the matter with the intervention of entire panchayat and respectables. The accused persons have felt sorry from the complainant in the presence of whole Panchayat and respectables and have promised to not enter into any quarrel with the complainant party in future. The complainant has further no objection if the above said FIR is quashed against the complainant. The compromise has been reduced in writing in the presence of respectables and Panchayat. In compliance of the order dated 22.02.2011, the parties were directed to appear before the trial Court for recording of their statements. Report of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Barnala has been received in this regard. As per report, parties came in the Court along with their counsels for recording of their statements. As per the statement of the complainant, matter has been compromised with the interventions of respectable in Panchayat, which is reduced into Crl. Misc. No. M-37030 of 2010 (O&M) -4- writing as Ex.CI. Statement of accused persons have also been recorded to the same effect. The compromise has been arrived with free will and without any pressure. They have now cut down all their differences and they shall be able to reside in healthy environment. Complainant has been identified by his father Jagit Singh Learned State counsel, on instructions from Head Constable Parminder Singh has informed the Court that there was a firm arm shot but none of the present accused had fired the shot. It was some unknown person who had fired the shot. The police party had not been able to trace out that accused person. Therefore, the FIR was registered against the present petitioners. Learned State counsel has further stated that the injuries are simple in nature and no offence under Section 307 IPC is made out. Broad guidelines have been laid down by the Full Bench of this Court in the case of Kulwinder Singh and Ors. vs. State of Punjab and another 2007(3) RCR (Crl.) 1052 for quashing the prosecution when parties entered into compromise. The Full Bench has observed that this power of quashing is not confined to matrimonial disputes alone. The relevant portion of the judgment reads as under:- “26.In Mrs. Shakuntala Sawhney v. Mrs. Crl. Misc. No. M-37030 of 2010 (O&M) -5- Kaushalya Sawhney and others, (1980)1 SCC 63, Hon'ble Krishna Iyer, J. aptly summoned up the essence of compromise in the following words :- “The finest hour of justice arrived propitiously when parties, despite falling apart, bury the hatchet and weave a sense of fellowship of reunion.” 27. The power to do complete justice is the very essence of every judicial justice dispensation system. It cannot be diluted by distorted perceptions and is not a slave to anything, except to the caution and circumspection, the standards of which the Court sets before it, in exercise of such plenary and unfettered power inherently vested in it while donning the cloak of compassion to achieve the ends of justice. No embargo, be in the shape of Section 320(9) if the Cr.P.C., or any other such curtailment, can whittle down the power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. 28. The compromise, in a modern society, is the sine qua non of harmony and orderly behaviour. It is the soul of justice and if the power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. is used to enhance such a compromise which, in turn, enhances the social emity and Crl. Misc. No. M-37030 of 2010 (O&M) -6- reduces friction, then it truly is finest hour of justice”. Disputes which have their genesis in a matrimonial discord, landlord-tenant matters, commercial transactions and other such matters can safely be dealt with by the Court by exercising its powers under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. in the event of a compromise, but this is not to say that the power is limited to such cases. There can never be any such rigid rule to prescribe the exercise of such power, especially in the absence of any premonitions to forecast and predict eventualities which the cause of justice may throw up during the course of a litigation.” The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Madan Mohan Abbot vs. State of Punjab 2008(2) RCR (Criminal) 429 has examined a case where quashing was sought of an FIR under Section 406 IPC being non-compoundable. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that :- “1. No useful purpose would be served in continuing with the proceedings in the light of the compromise – There was no possibility of conviction. 2 It is advisable that in the disputes where question involved is of purely personal nature and no public policy is Crl. Misc. No. M-37030 of 2010 (O&M) -7- involved – Court should ordinarily accept the compromise. 3. Keeping the matter alive with no possibility of conviction is a luxury which the Courts, grossly overburdened as they are, cannot afford.” Consequently, in view of the status report, compromise effected between the parties and in view of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of Madan Mohan Abbot vs. State of Punjab (supra), and the law laid down by the Full Bench of this Court in the case of Kulwinder Singh and others vs. State of Punjab and another (supra), FIR No.187 dated 07.07.2010 under Sections 307, 452, 323, 324, 148, 149 of the Code and under Sections 25/27 of the Arms Act, registered at Police Station City Barnala, (Annexure P-1), is quashed with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom qua petitioners. The petition stands disposed of accordingly. (RITU BAHRI) JUDGE May 31, 2011 G.Arora