Judges Bench of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in Kulwinder Singh and Others v. State of Punjab and Another

STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031 THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER PIRAVOM POLICE STATION, PIRAVOM (PO), ERNAKULAM DISTRICT,, PIN - 686664 MAHILA SOMAN AGED 62 YEARS Crl.M.C.No.10645 of 2024 - 2 - W/O SOMAN, CHANTHELIL VEETIL, CHANDELIPPADY BHAGAM, PIRAVOM VILLAGE, PIRAVOM, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN – 686664 BY ADVS. SMT. SEENA C., PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.CHITRA JOHNSON FOR R3 JOHNSON VARGHESE(J-250) THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON

24.03.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Crl.M.C.No.10645 of 2024 - 3 - C. JAYACHANDRAN, J. ------------------------------------ Crl.M.C.No.10645 of 2024 ------------------------------------ Dated, this the 24th day of March, 2025 ORDER A five Judges Bench of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in Kulwinder Singh and Others v. State of Punjab and Another [(2007) 4 CTC 769], framed broad guidelines as regards quashment of the criminal proceedings under Section 482 of the Code in respect of offences which are not compoundable in terms of Section 320 of the Code. One among the guidelines was that the offences against human body, other than murder and culpable homicide, may be permitted to be compounded, when the court is in a position to record a finding that the settlement between the parties is voluntary and fair. These guidelines were quoted with approval by a three Judges Bench of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and another [(2012) 10 SCC 303]. Similarly in Narinder Singh and Others v. State of Punjab [(2014) 6 SCC 466], the Hon'ble Supreme Court has gone to the extent of sanctioning invocation of Crl.M.C.No.10645 of 2024 - 4 - the inherent power under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code to quash the F.I.R. in a crime alleging offence under Section 307, which is a heinous and serious offence. A practical approach is seen adopted by the Hon'ble Supreme in Madan Mohan Abbot v. State of Punjab [(2008) 4 SCC 582] as regards quashment in respect of offences like 379, 406, 409, 418, etc., the relevant findings of which are extracted here below: “6. We need to emphasise that it is perhaps advisable that in disputes where the question involved is of a purely personal nature, the court should ordinarily accept the terms of the compromise even in criminal proceedings as keeping the matter alive with no possibility of a result in favour of the prosecution is a luxury which the courts, grossly overburdened as they are, cannot afford and that the time so saved can be utilised in deciding more effective and meaningful litigation. This is a common sense approach to the matter based on ground of realities and bereft of the technicalities of the law.”

2. In the facts at hand, petitioners are accused nos.1 and 2 in Crime No.540/2023 of Piravom Police Station, Ernakulam, now pending as C.C.No.656/2023 before the Crl.M.C.No.10645 of 2024 - 5 - Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Piravom. As per the final report, the offences alleged are under Sections 269, 294(b), 506(i) and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The petitioners seek quashment of entire proceedings in the above Calendar Case, on the strength of the settlement arrived at by and between the parties.

3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, learned counsel for the defacto complainant/3rd respondent and the learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the records.

4. When this Crl.M.C was moved, this Court directed to record the statement of the defacto complainant. The said direction was complied and the statement was handed over. On perusal of the same, it is clear that the issues between the petitioners and the defacto complainant are settled in mediation and that the 1st petitioner has tendered an apology to the defacto complainant, wherefore, the defacto complainant has no objection in quashing the case against the petitioners. This Court also perused the mediation agreement executed by and between the defacto complainant and the petitioners, wherein they would affirm the accord Crl.M.C.No.10645 of 2024 - 6 - of their settlement. That apart, it is noticed that, along with this Crl.M.C, an affidavit has been sworn to by the defacto complainant (3rd respondent herein) as Annexure-A4, wherein she would unequivocally state that the complaint emanated from some misunderstanding and that the disputes have been amicably settled in mediation before the Mediation Centre at High Court. The defacto complainant would also swear that she has no subsisting grievance against the petitioners and that she has no objection in quashing the criminal proceedings against the petitioners. The affidavit is sworn to on her own volition. This Court, is therefore, convinced that the settlement arrived at is genuine and bonafide. Learned Counsel for the 3rd respondent/defacto complainant would also endorse that the quashment sought for can be allowed.

5. In the light of the above referred facts, this Court is of the opinion that the necessary parameters, as culled out in Narinder Singh (supra), Madan Mohan Abbot (supra) and Gian Singh (Supra), are fully satisfied. This Court is convinced that further proceedings against the petitioners Crl.M.C.No.10645 of 2024 - 7 - will be a futile exercise, inasmuch as the disputes have already been settled. There is little possibility of any conviction in the crime. Dehors the settlement arrived at by and between the parties, if they are compelled to face the criminal proceedings, the same, in the estimation of this Court, will amount to abuse of process of Court. The quashment sought for would secure the ends of justice. This Court also notice that offence under Section 506(i) is compoundable, which is all the more a reason to accept the compromise between the parties. In the circumstances, this Crl.M.C. is allowed. Annexure-A1 F.I.R., Annexure-A2 Final Report in Crime no.540/2023 and all further proceedings in C.C.No.656/2023 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Piravom, are hereby quashed. Sd/- C. JAYACHANDRAN JUDGE SKP Crl.M.C.No.10645 of 2024 - 8 - APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 10645/2024 PETITIONERS' ANNEXURES: ANNEXURE A1 ANNEXURE A2 ANNEXURE A3 ANNEXURE A4 CERTIFIED COPY OF FIR ALONG WITH FIS IN CRIME NO. 540/2023 OF PIRAVOM POLICE STATION CERTIFIED COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN C.C. NO. 656/2023 ON THE FILES OF THE HON’BLE JUDICIAL FIRST-CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, PIRAVOM TRUE COPY OF THE PROTEST COMPLAINT AS CRL.M.P NO. 403/2024 IN R.C NO. 1/2024 ON THE FILES OF THE HON’BLE JFCM, PIRAVOM THE ORIGINAL AFFIDAVIT SWORN TO THE COMPLAINANT/3RD RESPONDENT DATED 15/3/2025 STATING THAT THE MATTER IS SETTLE AND SHE DOES NOT WISH TO PROCEED WITH C.C. NO. 656/2023 ON THE FILE OF JUDICIAL FIRST- CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, PIRAVOM, RESPONDENTS' ANNEXURES: NIL TRUE COPY P.A. TO JUDGE