Crl. Misc. No. M-2917 of 2011 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No. M-2917 of 2011 (O&M) Date of decision : 07.04.2011 Balbir Singh and others ......Petitioners versus State of Punjab and another ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI Present: Mr. S.K. Sharma, Advocate for the petitioners. Sh. Guninder Singh Brar, A.A.G., Punjab for respondent No. 1-State Mr. Vinod Kumar, Advocate for respondent No. 2 **** RITU BAHRI , J. (Oral) The present petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing the FIR No.55 dated 17.12.2010(Annexure P-1) under Sections 353, 186, 341, 332 of IPC, registered at Police Station Balongi and all the subsequent proceeding arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise/affidavit dated 07.01.2011 (Annexure P-2). Before adverting in to the merits of the case, it would first be necessary to point out the contents of the F.I.R. Petitioner was working in Punjab State Power Corporation Department and his headquarter was Sub Division, IA, Phasi I Mohali. His duty in the area is to stop the theft of electricity and inform the department after find the misuse of the electricity. On 17.12.2010, complainant along with Jaswinder Singh, Meter Inspector special Mandal, Mohali office, Sukhwinder Singh, JE and Surinder Singh, Crl. Misc. No. M-2917 of 2011 (O&M) -2- Assistant Line Man went to the village Balongi, Bad Majra for checking and during checking, when he went to village Jujhar nagar for checking, there was use of electricity in these shops but no meter was installed there. He found that by putting a kundi connection on the electricity supply wire going to the house of Sushil kumar account No. BF361236 Jujhar Nagar. When he told the said person, that they have caught him red handed and registered a case and issued a memo to him, he refused to sign the same and said that he was going to call his owner. At about 2.30 pm, Rayaj, Balbir singh, Bimla, Kashmir Singh Bhola and Raj Kumar came there and started manhandling with the complainant. Balbir Singh gave fist blow on the face of the complainant and this blow cut the lips of the complainant and blood started oozing from it. They again caught him and gave beatings to him. In the above background, F.I.R was registered against the petitioners. However, during the pendency of the investigation, both the parties arrived at a compromise with the intervention of the respectables. As per the compromise/affidavit (Annexure P2), matter has been compromised and now complainant does not want to pursue the case against the petitioners and has also no objection if the F.I.R got registered by him is quashed or cancelled. It has further been stated in the F.I.R that petitioners had deposited the fine amount i.e Rs.32,936/- as per the page no. 8 of checking register, book no. 47 dated 17.12.2010 for stealing the electricity with the Mohali office of Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd against BA- 16P, 416/5241. In compliance of order dated 31.1.2011, Judicial Magistrate Ist class, Kharar has sent the report. As per report, the complainant as well as Crl. Misc. No. M-2917 of 2011 (O&M) -3- petitioners have put in appearance and got their statements recorded wherein they have submitted that they have compromised the matter and the said compromise has been effected voluntarily and without any pressure or undue influence. Counsel for respondent No. 2 appeared in the Court and filed an affidavit of the complainant to the effect that the compromise has been effected between the parties with their own free and sweet will and without any pressure from any side and in the presence of respectables. It has further been stated in the affidavit that respondent No. 2 that he does not want to proceed further with the present case and has no objection, if the above said F.I.R is cancelled or quashed. So, it appears that the compromise is voluntarily and without any pressure. Copy of compromise 07.01.2011 is annexed as Annexure P-2. As per the affidavit filed by respondent No. 2, the matter has been compromised and bears the signatures of the deponent and the same was reduced into writing with the consent of the complainant without any compulsion etc. The affidavit is taken on record as Annexure A-1. 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. Kaushalya Sawhney and others, (1980)1 SCC 63, Hon'ble Krishna Iyer, J. aptly summoned up the essence of compromise in the following Crl. Misc. No. M-2917 of 2011 (O&M) -4- 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 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 Crl. Misc. No. M-2917 of 2011 (O&M) -5- justice may throw up during the course of a litigation.” The ratio of the Full Bench judgment is a special reference which has been made to the offences against human body other than murder and culpable homicide where the victim dies in the course of transaction would fall in the category where compounding may not be permitted. Heinous offences like highway robbery, dacoity or a case involving clear- cut allegations of rape should also fall in the prohibited category. However, the offences against human body other than murder and culpable homicide may be permitted to be compounded when the Court is in the position to record a finding that the settlement between the parties is voluntary and fair. The Court must examine the cases of weaker and vulnerable victims with necessary caution. 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 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.” Crl. Misc. No. M-2917 of 2011 (O&M) -6- Consequently, in view of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case 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.55 dated 17.12.2010(Annexure P-1) under Sections 353, 186, 341, 332 of IPC, registered at Police Station Balongi is quashed with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom qua petitioners. The petition stands disposed of. (RITU BAHRI) JUDGE April 07, 2011 G.Arora