Kulwinder Singh & Ors. v. State of Punjab
Case at a glance
Outcome
Quashed
the FIR is quashed on the basis of compromise qua the petitioner
Provisions considered
Judgment
BEFORE: HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA Present: Mr. Upender Prasher, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. S.S. Chahal, AAG, Punjab. Mr. Saurabh Garg, Advocate for respondent No.2. *** NIDHI GUPTA, J. (ORAL) The petitioners, who are husband and in-laws of respondent No. 2- complainant have filed the present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C., for quashing of FIR No. 0079 dated 17.07.2016 registered under Sections 498-A, 34 IPC 1860 at Police Station Majitha District Amritsar Rural and all the consequential proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise effected between the parties. Pursuant to the order dated 14.03.2023 passed by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court, the parties appeared before the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Amritsar, to get their statements recorded. Learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Amritsar, has submitted her report along with statements of the parties vide letter dated 18.07.2023 duly forwarded by the learned District and Sessions Judge, Amritsar.
Operative part
A perusal of the above said report would show that the petitioners and respondent No. 2 have appeared and suffered statements with respect to the PUSHPINDER SAINI 2024.03.01 01:31 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-12239-2023 -2- (cid:1)(cid:2)(cid:1)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:6)(cid:6)(cid:7)(cid:4)(cid:8)(cid:2)(cid:1)(cid:9)(cid:10)(cid:11)(cid:12)(cid:8) compromise, which have been found to be valid, genuine, voluntary and without any coercion or undue influence. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the present FIR emanates from the matrimonial dispute between the parties. He further submits that as per report, all the accused are party to the compromise and they have never been declared as proclaimed offender. Learned State counsel has stated that he has ‘no objection’ in case the FIR is quashed on the basis of compromise qua the petitioner. This Court has heard the learned counsel for the parties and has perused the file.
After perusing the report submitted by the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Amritsar, this Court finds that the matter has been amicably settled between the petitioners and respondent No. 2. Since the matter has been settled and the parties have decided to live in peace, this Court feels that in order to secure the ends of justice, the criminal proceedings deserve to be quashed. Vide order dated 14.07.2023 passed by Addl. Principal Judge Family Court, Amritsar, the parties have also been granted divorce under Section 13-B of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 by mutual consent. As per the Full Bench judgment of this Court in “Kulwinder Singh and others Vs State of Punjab”, 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052, it is held that High Court has power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to allow the compounding of non-compoundable offence and quash the proceedings where the High Court is of the opinion that the same is required to prevent the abuse of the process of PUSHPINDER SAINI 2024.03.01 01:31 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-12239-2023 -3- (cid:1)(cid:2)(cid:1)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:6)(cid:6)(cid:7)(cid:4)(cid:8)(cid:2)(cid:1)(cid:9)(cid:10)(cid:11)(cid:12)(cid:8) law or otherwise to secure the ends of justice.
This power of quashing is not confined to matrimonial disputes alone. Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of “Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab and another”, 2012 (4) RCR (Criminal) 543, had also observed that in order to secure the ends of justice or to prevent the abuse of process of Court, inherent power can be used by this Court to quash criminal proceedings in which a compromise has been effected. The relevant portion of para 57 of the said judgment is reproduced here-in-below:-
57. The position that emerges from the above discussion can be summarised thus: the power of the High Court in quashing a criminal proceeding or FIR or complaint in exercise of its inherent jurisdiction is distinct and different from the power given to a criminal court for compounding the offences under Section 320 of the Code. Inherent power is of wide plenitude with no statutory limitation but it has to be exercised in accord with the guideline engrafted in such power viz; (i) to secure the ends of justice or (ii) to prevent abuse of the process of any Court.
In view of what has been discussed here-in-above, this petition is allowed and FIR No.
0079 dated 17.07.2016 registered under Sections 498-A, 34 IPC 1860 at Police Station Majitha District Amritsar Rural, along with all other consequential proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise, are ordered to be quashed qua the petitioners. February 26, 2024 (NIDHI GUPTA) JUDGE Whether speaking/ reasoned Whether reportable : : Yes/No Yes/No PUSHPINDER SAINI 2024.03.01 01:31 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: the FIR is quashed on the basis of compromise qua the petitioner
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482; Indian Penal Code, 1860; Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Punjab & Haryana High Court, on 26 Feb 2024. The bench was NIDHI GUPTA.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.