Date Rupinder Singh ingh and others v. State of Haryana ryana and others
Case Details
CRM-M-1096-20 2025 (O&M) -1- 385 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJA IN TH AT CHANDIGAR UNJAB AND HARYANA IGARH CRM CRM-M-1096-2025 (O&M) Date of Decision : 25.03.2025 Date Rupinder Singh ingh and others ....Petitioners VERSUS State of Haryana ryana and others ....Respondents CORAM : HON HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUDE SUDEEPTI SHARMA Present: Mr. Mr. Pankaj Mittal, Advocate for the for the petitioners. (cid:1) (cid:1) (cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:4) (cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:1)(cid:5)(cid:3)(cid:6)(cid:7)(cid:8)(cid:1)(cid:9)(cid:10)(cid:11)(cid:12)(cid:10)(cid:8)(cid:13)(cid:10)(cid:14)(cid:15)(cid:1)(cid:5)(cid:16)(cid:16)(cid:14)(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:4)(cid:17)(cid:15)(cid:1)(cid:18)(cid:10) (cid:1)(cid:18)(cid:10)(cid:3)(cid:19)(cid:10)(cid:8)(cid:10)(cid:4)(cid:1) (cid:1) Mr r. Kushager Goyal, Advocate for re e for respondent No.2 and 3. SUDEEPTI SHA I SHARMA, J. (Oral) -.- 1. The present petition has been filed The filed under Section 528 of Bharatiy haratiya Nagarik Suraksh uraksha Sanhita (BNSS) 2023 for q
Legal Reasoning
for quashing of FIR No.0964 date dated 08.12.2024 regist registered under Sections 190, 191 , 191 (2), 351 (2) of Bharatiya Nyay Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and 23 and 3 (1) (r), 3 (1) (w) (ii), 3 (2) 3 (2) (va) of Scheduled Castes and th and the Scheduled Tribe Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) ities) Act, 1989 (Amendmant 2015 2015), registered at Po at Police Station Shahabad, District istrict Kurukshetra and all subseque sequent proceedings arisi s arising out of the said FIR, on , on the basis of compromise date e dated 04.01.2025 (Anne (Annexure P-2). 2. Pursuant to the order dated 13.02.20 Pursu .2025, a report dated 19.02.2025 .2025 of Sub Division Judi Judicial Magistrate, Shahabd has be has been received by this Court where wherein it has been stated stated that the statements of the par the parties have been recorded and th and the parties have state e stated that they have compromised t ised the matter voluntarily without an out any threat, pressure, sure, undue influence or fraud and d and that the complainant/responde pondent Gaurav Arora 2025.03.27 15:44 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-1096-20 2025 (O&M) -2- No.2 and 3 have ve no objection to the quashing of t ng of the present FIR. Statements of th ts of the parties have also b port. e also been appended with the report. 3. The Apex Court in the case of Gia The Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab njab & Anr. [2012 (10) S (10) SCC 303] has held as under : “57. The position that emerg merges from the above discussion ca on can be summarised thus: the pow power of the High Court in quashin ashing a criminal proceeding or FI r FIR or complaint in exercise of i of its inherent jurisdiction is distin distinct and different from the pow power given to a criminal court for t for compounding the offences und under Section 320 of the Code. Inh . Inherent power is of wide plenitud nitude with no statutory limitation b on but it has to be exercised in acco accord with the guideline engrafted fted in such power viz; (i) to secu secure the ends of justice or (ii) to p to prevent abuse of the process of an of any Court. In what cases power wer to quash the criminal proceedin eeding or complaint or F.I.R may be y be exercised where the offender an er and victim have settled their dispu dispute would depend on the facts an ts and circumstances of each case a se and no category can be prescribe ribed. However, before exercise of e of such power, the High Court mu t must have due regard to the na e nature and gravity of the crim crime. Heinous and serious offence ences of mental depravity or offenc fences like murder, rape, dacoity, ity, etc. cannot be fittingly quashe ashed even though the victim or vic r victim's family and the offender ha r have settled the dispute. Such offen offences are not private in nature an re and have serious impact on soc society. Similarly, any compromi romise Gaurav Arora 2025.03.27 15:44 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document between the victim and offe offender in relation to the offenc fences CRM-M-1096-20 2025 (O&M) -3- under special statutes like Pr e Prevention of Corruption Act or th or the offences committed by publi ublic servants while working in th n that capacity etc; cannot provi rovide for any basis for quashin ashing criminal proceedings involvin olving such offences. But the crimin iminal cases having overwhelmin lmingly and pre-dominatingly civ civil flavour stand on different foo t footing for the purposes of quashin shing, particularly the offences ari s arising from commercial, financia ncial, mercantile, civil, partnership rship or such like transactions or th or the offences arising out of matrim atrimony relating to dowry, etc. or th or the family disputes where the the wrong is basically private te or personal in nature and the p the parties have resolved their enti entire dispute. In this category of y of cases, High Court may qua quash criminal proceedings if in its n its view, because of the compromi romise between the offender and vict victim, the possibility of conviction tion is remote and bleak and contin ntinuation of criminal case would p ld put accused to great oppressio ession and prejudice and extrem xtreme injustice would be caused to d to him by not quashing the crimin iminal case despite full and complet plete settlement and compromise wi e with the victim. In other words, rds, the High Court must consid nsider whether it would be unfair or ir or contrary to the interest of justi justice to continue with the criminal inal proceeding or continuation of th of the criminal proceeding would t ld tantamount to abuse of process ess of law despite settlement and co d compromise between the victim an m and wrongdoer and whether to to secure the ends of justice, it , it is Gaurav Arora 2025.03.27 15:44 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document appropriate that criminal c al case is put to an end and if th if the CRM-M-1096-20 2025 (O&M) -4- answer to the above questio estion(s) is in affirmative, the Hig High Court shall be well within its n its jurisdiction to quash the crimin iminal proceeding.” 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner Lear ioner has also referred to the law la law laid down by this Co his Court in Kulwinder Singh & O & Ors. vs. State of Punjab & An & Anr. [2007 (3) RCR RCR (Criminal) 1052] wherein it h in non- in it has been held that even in non compoundable of ble offences, if the parties have enter e entered into a compromise, this Cou is Court has wide powers owers under Section 482 CrPC to q C to quash the proceedings to preve prevent abuse of law and w and secure the ends of justice. 5.
Decision
In view of the above and keeping in In vi ing in view the report by the Trial Cou al Court that the parties h rties have genuinely entered into a c nto a compromise and all the dispute disputes between the parti e parties have been resolved, it would would not be in the interest of justice ustice to continue with the the criminal proceedings. 6. Resultantly, FIR No.0964 dated 08.1 Resu 08.12.2024 registered under Section Sections 190, 191 (2), 351 ), 351 (2) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita anhita, 2023 and 3 (1) (r), 3 (1) (w) (ii (w) (ii), 3 (2) (va) of Sche Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled eduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocitie rocities) Act, 1989 (Amen (Amendmant 2015), registered at P at Police Station Shahabad, Distri District Kurukshetra and and all subsequent proceedings ari gs arising out of the said FIR, on th , on the basis of comprom promise dated 04.01.2025 (Annexure nexure P-2), is quashed. 7. 8. The petition is accordingly allowed. The owed. Pending applications, if any, also sta Pend lso stand disposed off. 2025 March 25, 2025 Gaurav Arora (SU (SUDEEPTI SHARMA) JUDGE Whether Whether ether speaking/non-speaking : Speakin peaking Yes/No : Yes/N ether reportable Gaurav Arora 2025.03.27 15:44 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document