30.04.2025 Date Karamjit Dhaliwa haliwal @ Karamjit Singh @ Karam @ aram @ Kamal v. CORAM : HON HON’BLE
Case Details
CRM-M-7592-20 2025 (O&M) -1- - 393 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJA IN TH AT CHANDIGAR UNJAB AND HARYANA IGARH CRM-M-7592-2025 (O&M) CRM Date of Decision : 30.04.2025 Date Karamjit Dhaliwa haliwal @ Karamjit Singh @ Karam @ aram @ Kamal ....Petitioner State of Punjab njab and others ....Respondents VERSUS CORAM : HON HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUDE SUDEEPTI SHARMA Present: Ms. R for the petitioner. for th s. Ruby Kaur, Advocate for Mr. G Mr. G.S. Chanota, Advocate r. Rajender Singh Bhatta, DAG, Pu Mr for respondent No.1-State. for re Punjab Mr. r. H.K. Brinda, Advocate for respo r respondent No.2 and 3. SUDEEPTI SHA I SHARMA, J. (Oral) -.- 1. The present petition has been filed u The filed under Section 482 of the Code Code of Criminal Procedu
Facts
ocedure, 1973 for quashing the FIR No.65 dated 08-04-2022 registere gistered under Section 27 ion 279, 304-A, IPC at Police stat e station Tanda District:- Hoshiarp shiarpur (Annexure P-1) an 1) and DDR No. 39 dated 11-04-202 2022 Police Station:-Tanda, Distric istrict:- Hoshiarpur (Anne (Annexure P-2) as well as subsequent quent proceedings and orders arising o sing out of the said FIR an IR and DDR, on the basis of comprom exure P- promise dated 30-08-2024 (Annexure P 3). 2. Pursuant to the order dated 27.03.202 Pursu .2025, a report dated 24.04.2025 of th of the Judicial Magistrat gistrate 1st Class, Dasuya has been rec en received by this Court wherein it h in it has been stated that th that the statements of the parties have s have been recorded and the parties hav ies have stated that they ha hey have compromised the matter volun r voluntarily without any threat, pressur ressure, Gaurav Arora 2025.05.01 15:48 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-7592-20 2025 (O&M) -2- - undue influence o ence or fraud and that the complaina plainant/respondent No.2 to 3 have no objection to the qu the quashing of the present FIR. Copie Copies of statements of the parties hav ies have also been appende pended with the report. 3. The Apex Court in the case of Gian S The A Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab & An & Anr. [2012 (10) SCC 3 CC 303] has held as under : “57. The position that emerge erges from the above discussion can can be summarised thus: the power wer of the High Court in quashing hing a criminal proceeding or FIR 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 rt for compounding the offences und under Section 320 of the Code. Inher nherent power is of wide plenitude wi e with no statutory limitation but it t it has to be exercised in accord wi d with the guideline engrafted in suc such power viz; (i) to secure the en e ends of justice or (ii) to prevent ab t abuse of the process of any Court. urt. In what cases power to quash the h the criminal proceeding or complai plaint or F.I.R may be exercised wh d where the offender and victim ha have settled their dispute wou would depend on the facts an and circumstances of each case a se and no category can be prescribe ribed. However, before exercise of of such power, the High Court mu rt must have due regard to the nature ture and gravity of the crime. Heino einous and serious offences of menta ental depravity or offences like murde urder, rape, dacoity, etc. cannot be t be fittingly quashed even though t gh the victim or victim's family an y and the offender have settled t ed the dispute. Such offences are not not private in nature and have serio erious impact on society. Similarly, a rly, any compromise between the victi victim Gaurav Arora 2025.05.01 15:48 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-7592-20 2025 (O&M) -3- - and offender in relation to the the offences under special statutes li es like Prevention of Corruption Act o Act or the offences committed by publ public servants while working in tha n that capacity etc; cannot provide f ide for any basis for quashing crim criminal proceedings involving su such offences. But the criminal cas cases having overwhelmingly and pr d pre- dominatingly civil flavour s ur stand on different footing for t or the purposes of quashing, partic articularly the offences arising fro from commercial, financial, mercan rcantile, civil, partnership or such li ch like transactions or the offences arising out of matrimony relating ting to dowry, etc. or the family disp disputes where the wrong is basical sically private or personal in nature ture and the parties have resolved the d their entire dispute. In this categor egory 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 oppression a on and prejudice and extreme injusti justice would be caused to him by by not quashing the criminal ca l case despite full and complete set e settlement and compromise with t ith the victim. In other words, the Hi e High Court must consider whether ther it would be unfair or contrary t ry to the interest of justice to contin ntinue with the criminal proceeding ding or continuation of the crimin riminal proceeding would tantamount ount to abuse of process of law despi espite settlement and compromise b ise between the victim and wrongdo gdoer and whether to secure the en e ends of justice, it is appropriate th te that criminal case is put to an en n end and if the answer to the abo above Gaurav Arora 2025.05.01 15:48 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-7592-20 2025 (O&M) -4- - question(s) is in affirmative, t ve, the High Court shall be well with within its jurisdiction to quash the cri e criminal proceeding.” 4.
Legal Reasoning
this Court in Kulw Kulwinder Singh & Ors. vs. State o State of Punjab & Anr. [2007 (3) RC 3) RCR (Criminal) 1052] 1052] wherein it has been held that ev that even in non-compoundable offence ffences, if the parties hav es have entered into a compromise, th ise, this Court has wide powers und rs under Section 482 Cr.P P.C to quash the proceedings to pr s to prevent abuse of process of law an law and secure the ends of nds of justice. 5. In view of the above and keeping in In vi ping in view the report sent by the t trial Court that the par he parties have genuinely entered into d into a compromise and all the disput disputes between the partie parties have been resolved, it would ould not be in the interest of justice ustice to continue with the th the criminal proceedings. 6. Resultantly, FIR No.65 dated 08-04 Resu 04-2022 registered under Section 27 ion 279, 304-A, IPC at Pol Police station Tanda District Hoshia oshiarpur (Annexure P-1) and DDR N DR No. 39 dated 11-04-20 2022 Police Station:-Tanda, Distri District:- Hoshiarpur (Annexure P-2) 2) as well as subsequen sequent proceedings and orders arising arising out of the said FIR and DDR, o DR, on the basis of compr compromise dated 30-08-2024 (Annexu nnexure P-3), is quashed. 7. 8. The petition is accordingly allowed. The p Pending applications, if any, also stan Pend
Arguments
Learned counsel for the petitioner ha Lear ner has referred to the law laid down b own by
Decision
so stand disposed of. April 30, 2025 Gaurav Aroa (SU (SUDEEPTI SHARMA) JUDGE Whether Whether ether speaking/non-speaking : Speakin peaking Yes/No : Yes/N ether reportable Gaurav Arora 2025.05.01 15:48 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document