Criminal Misc. No. M- 10529 of 2011 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Misc. No. M- 10529 of 2011 Date of decision:- 07.04.2011 Harvail Singh and others ...Petitioners Versus State of Punjab and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI Present:- Mr. Veneet Sharma, Advocate for the petitioners. RITU BAHRI J.(Oral) The present petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing the FIR No.154 dated 25.8.1999 under Sections 323,324,325,452,148 and 149 IPC, registered at Police Station Tanda, District Hoshiarpur (Annexure P- 1) and the judgment dated 12.2.2008 passed by the Court of Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Dasuya, District Hoshiarpur on the basis of compromise dated 18.11.2010 (Annexure P-3). The present petitioners were summoned to face trial and were convicted. Accused Dilbagh Singh was convicted for the offence under Sections 323,148,452,324/149 and 325/149 IPC, accused Gurdeep was convicted for the offence under Sections 323,148,452,324/149 and 325/149 IPC, accused Gurmit Singh was convicted for the offence under Sections 324,148,452,323/149 and 325/149 IPC and accused Harvail Singh was convicted for the offence under Sections 325,148,452, 323/149 and 324/149 IPC and were sentenced as under:- Criminal Misc. No. M- 10529 of 2011 -2- (i) Dilbagh Singh Under Section Sentence a 323 IPC R.I. for 6 months and fine of Rs.500/-, in default of payment of fine, R.I. for 15 days. b 148 IPC R.I. for 1 year and fine of Rs.500/-, in default of payment of fine, R.I. for 15 days. c 452 IPC R.I. for 1 year and fine of Rs.500/-, in default of payment of fine, R.I. for 15 days. d 324/149 IPC R.I. for 1 year and fine of Rs.500/-, in default of payment of fine, R.I. for 15 days. e 325/149 IPC R.I. for 1 year and fine of Rs.500/-, in default of payment of fine, R.I. for 15 days. (ii) Gurdeep Singh Under Section Sentence a 323 IPC R.I. for 6 months and fine of Rs.500/-, in default of payment of fine, R.I. for 15 days. b 148 IPC R.I. for 1 year and fine of Rs.500/-, in default of payment of fine, R.I. for 15 days. c 452 IPC R.I. for 1 year and fine of Rs.500/-, in default of payment of fine, R.I. for 15 days. d 324/149 IPC R.I. for 1 year and fine of Rs.500/-, in default of payment of fine, R.I. for 15 days. e 325/149 IPC R.I. for 1 year and fine of Rs.500/-, in default of payment of fine, R.I. for 15 days. (iii) Gurmit Singh Under Section Sentence a 324 IPC R.I. for 1 year and fine of Rs.500/-, in default of payment of fine, R.I. for 15 days. b 148 IPC R.I. for 1 year and fine of Rs.500/-, in default of payment of fine, R.I. for 15 days. c 452 IPC R.I. for 1 year and fine of Rs.500/-, in default of payment of fine, R.I. for 15 days. d 323/149 IPC R.I. for six months and fine of Rs.500/-, in default of payment of fine, R.I. for 15 days. e 325/149 IPC R.I. for 1 year and fine of Rs.500/-, in default of payment of fine, R.I. for 15 days. (iv) Harvail Singh Under Section Sentence a 325 IPC R.I. for 1 year and fine of Rs.500/-, in default of payment of fine, R.I. for 15 days. Criminal Misc. No. M- 10529 of 2011 -3- Under Section Sentence b 148 IPC R.I. for 1 year and fine of Rs.500/-, in default of payment of fine, R.I. for 15 days. c 452 IPC R.I. for 1 year and fine of Rs.500/-, in default of payment of fine, R.I. for 15 days. d 323/149 IPC R.I. for six months and fine of Rs.500/-, in default of payment of fine, R.I. for 15 days. e 324/149 IPC R.I. for 1 year and fine of Rs.500/-, in default of payment of fine, R.I. for 15 days. Their appeal against this judgment of the trial Court is pending. During pendency of appeal, the parties have entered into compromise on 18.11.2010 (Annexure P-3). As per compromise, with the intervention of panchayats of different villages and respectable of the village the compromise has been effected. As per compromise complainant Pakhar Singh son of Daulat Singh had got the FIR registered and the petitioners have since been convicted. The appeal is pending before the Court of the District & Sessions Judge. After compromise, the parties have no grudge against each other and do not wish to pursue the proceedings in the present FIR and in case the petitioners are acquitted, the complainant has no objection and they will remain bound by the deed of the compromise. An application has been filed by the appellants for permission to compound the offences before the Court of Sessions Judge. The offence punishable under Section 452 IPC is non-compoundable, therefore, the application was adjourned to 29.4.2011 to enable the appellants to approach the High Court. It has been contended by counsel for the petitioners that now the matter has been duly compromised on 18.11.2010 (Annexure P-3) and since the offence under Section 452 IPC is non-compoundable, the petitioners have approached this Court. The original compromise deed is taken on record wherein the complainant does not want to proceed with the criminal proceedings against the petitioners and has no objection if the appeal, pending before the Appellate Court is decided in terms of compromise. In view of the compromise arrived at between the parties, the trial Criminal Misc. No. M- 10529 of 2011 -4- is likely to result into acquittal and continuous proceedings against the petitioners will be wastage of time. As per Full Bench of this Court in Kulwinder Singh and others versus State of Punjab and another 2007(3) RCR (Criminal) 1052 (P&H) has held that the Court has wide power to quash the proceedings even in non-compoundable offences notwithstanding the bar under Section 320 Cr.P.C. in order to prevent the abuse of law and to secure the ends of justice. In a similar situated case, where the accused were convicted and during the pendency of the appeal, the parties had compromised the matter, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Khursheed and another versus State of U.P. and another 2007(4) RCR (Criminal) 495 granted permission to compound the offence under Section 325 IPC. In view of the settled proposition of law and in view of the fact that the parties have compromised the matter, there is no impediment to grant permission to the parties to compound the offence. Accordingly, the parties are allowed to compound the offence under Section 452 IPC. As such the present petition is partly allowed and the petitioners are directed to appear before the Appellate Court where the appeal is pending, who shall pass an appropriate order in the light of permission having granted by this Court to the parties to compound the offence. The criminal miscellaneous petition is partly allowed. April 07, 2011 ( RITU BAHRI ) Vijay Asija JUDGE