Surinder S nder Singh @ Kaka v. State of Pu of Punjab & Ors.

AM:- HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NI E NIDHI GUPTA Present:- Mr. Kulbir Singh Sekhon, Adv n, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Rishu Madan, AAG, Punj , Punjab. Mr. R.S. Sidhu, Advocate for r te for respondents No.2 and 3. NIDHI GU HI GUPTA J. (Oral) The petitioner has filed the pre the present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C Cr.P.C., for quashing of FIR No.161 d o.161 dated 28.7.2018 (Annexure P-1) under under Sections 363 and 366 IPC (Se C (Sections 3, 4 of POCSO Act added late d later on), registered at Police St ice Station Lambi, District Sri Muktsar S tsar Sahib and all the conseque sequential proceedings arising therefrom, from, on the basis of compromise dat ise dated 07.5.2024 (Annexure P- 2) effected fected between the parties. Pursuant to the order dated dated 08.7.2024 passed by this Court, the t, the parties appeared before the le the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sri e, Sri Muktsar Sahib, to get their stat ir statements recorded. Learned Additional tional Sessions Judge, Sri Muktsar ktsar Sahib, has submitted her report alon rt along with copies of statements of t ts of the parties vide letter dated VIJAY ASIJA 2024.11.18 09.35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-31582-2024 2

27.9.2024 d .2024 duly forwarded by the learned D rned District and Sessions Judge, Sri Muktsa uktsar Sahib. A perusal of the above said r said report would show that the petitioner a ioner and respondents No.2 and 3 ha d 3 have appeared and suffered statements ments with respect to the compromise omise, which have been found to be without ithout any pressure, coercion, threat or reat or undue influence. Learned counsel for the peti e petitioner submits that as per report, peti rt, petitioner is the only accused person person in the present FIR and has never been ffender. r been declared as proclaimed offender Learned State counsel has l has stated that he has ‘no objection’ i ction’ in case the FIR is quashed on th on the basis of compromise qua the petition etitioner. This Court has heard the lear e learned counsel for the parties and has per as perused the file. After perusing the report s port submitted by the learned Additional tional Sessions Judge, Sri Muktsar S tsar Sahib, this Court finds that the matter matter has been amicably settled b tled between the petitioner and respondent ndents No.2 and 3.

Since the matte matter has been settled and the parties hav es have decided to live in peace, this , this Court feels that in order to secure the re the ends of justice, the criminal inal proceedings deserve to be quashed. As per the Full Bench jud ch judgment of this Court in “Kulwinde inder Singh and others Vs State o ate of Punjab”, 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) inal) 1052, it is held that High Cour h Court has power under Section 482 Cr.P.C Cr.P.C. to allow the compounding of ng of non-compoundable offence and quash t uash the proceedings where the High High Court is of the opinion that VIJAY ASIJA 2024.11.18 09.35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-31582-2024 3 the same i ame is required to prevent the abuse abuse of the process of law or otherwise t rwise to secure the ends of justice. Th ce. This power of quashing is not confined to ined to matrimonial disputes alone.

Hon'ble Apex Court in the cas he case of “Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab njab and another”, 2012 (4) RCR RCR (Criminal) 543, had also observed th rved that in order to secure the ends ends of justice or to prevent the abuse of pr e of process of Court, inherent power c ower can be used by this Court to quash crim h criminal proceedings in which a com a compromise has been effected. The releva relevant portion of para 57 of the sa the said judgment is reproduced here-in-bel below:-

57. The position that emerge can be summarised thus: the p quashing a criminal proceedi exercise of its inherent jur different from the power give compounding the offences und Inherent power is of wide p limitation but it has to be ex guideline engrafted in such p ends of justice or (ii) to prev any Court.

erges from the above discussion the power of the High Court in eeding or FIR or complaint in t jurisdiction is distinct and given to a criminal court for under Section 320 of the Code. de plenitude with no statutory e exercised in accord with the ch power viz; (i) to secure the prevent abuse of the process of In view of what has been dis een discussed here-in-above, this petition is ion is allowed and FIR No.161 dated dated 28.7.2018 (Annexure P-1) under Secti r Sections 363 and 366 IPC (Sections ctions 3, 4 of POCSO Act added later on), on), registered at Police Station La ion Lambi, District Sri Muktsar Sahib and b and all the consequential proceedin ceedings arising therefrom on the basis of com of compromise are ordered to be quas e quashed qua the petitioner. ember 12, 2024 November Vijay Asija Whether spea Whether Repo r speaking/reasoned Yes / No r Reportable Yes / No ( NIDHI GUPTA ) JUDGE VIJAY ASIJA 2024.11.18 09.35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document