IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH.
Criminal Misc.20996-M of 2008
DATE OF DECISION : SEPTEMBER 4, 2008
KAMLA SHARMA ....... PETITIONER(S)
VERSUS
THE STATE OF PUNJAB HARYANA & ANR. .... RESPONDENT(S)
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA
PRESENT: Mr. HPS Aulakh, Advocate, for the petitioner(s).
Mr. Sidarath Sarup, AAG, Haryana.
Mr. Naveen Batra, Advocate, for respondent No.2.
AJAI LAMBA, J. (Oral)
This petition under Section 482, Code of Criminal Procedure,
seeks quashing of FIR No.113 dated 31.3.2008 under Sections 420, 406,
506, 120-B, Indian Penal Code, Police Station, Ambala Cantt. (Annexure
P-1) on the basis of compromise (Annexure P-2).
It has been contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner
that respondent No.2-complainant is related to the petitioner. There were
some transactions on account of which certain disputes arose and a
complaint was made to the Magistrate, which was referred under Section
Criminal Misc.20996-M of 2008 2
156(3), Code of Criminal Procedure, whereupon the FIR (Annexure P-1)
came to be registered. Now, with the intervention of respectables of
society, the matter has been settled. There were money disputes and the
disputes do not survive any more. The compromise (Annexure P-2) is
signed by the complainant as well.
Learned counsel for the respondent-complainant has endorsed
the factum of compromise and prays that the FIR be quashed.
Learned counsel for the respondent-State, on instructions
from ASI Maan Singh, has also endorsed the factum of compromise.
This Court in a full Bench (5 Judges) has considered the
issue of quashing of proceedings in view of compromise in Kulwinder
Singh vs. State of Punjab, 2007(3) RCR(Criminal) 1052 (Full Bench).
The following has been held in paras 28 to 30:-
“28. The compromise, in a modern society, is the sine qua
non of harmony and orderly behaviour. It is the soul of justice
and if the power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C is used to
enhance such a compromise which, in turn, enhances the so-
cial amity and reduces friction, then it truly is “finest hour of
justice”. Disputes which have their genesis in a matrimonial
discord, landlord-tenant matters, commercial transactions and
other such matters can safely be dealt with by the Court by
exercising its powers under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C in the
event of a compromise, but this is not to say that the power is
limited to such cases. There can never be any such rigid rule
to prescribe the exercise of such power, especially in the ab-
sence of any premonitions to forecast and predict eventuali-
ties which the cause of justice may throw up during the
course of a litigation.
Criminal Misc.20996-M of 2008 3
29. The only inevitable conclusion from the above discussion
is that there is no statutory bar under the Cr.P.C which can af-
fect the inherent power of this Court under Section 482. Fur-
ther, the same cannot be limited to matrimonial cases alone
and the Court has the wide power to quash the proceedings
even in non-compoundable offences notwithstanding the bar
under Section 320 of the Cr.P.C in order to prevent the abuse
of law and to secure the ends of justice.
30. The power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C is to be
exercised Ex-Debitia Justitia to prevent an abuse of process
of Court. There can neither be an exhaustive list nor the
defined para meters to enable a High Court to invoke or
exercise its inherent powers. It will always depend upon the
facts and circumstances of each case. The power under
Section 482 of the Cr.P.C has no limits. However, the High
Court will exercise it sparingly and with utmost care and
caution. The exercise of power has to be with circumspection
and restraint. The Court is a vital and an extra ordinary
effective instrument to maintain and control social order. The
Courts play role of paramount importance in achieving peace,
harmony and ever-lasting congeniality in society. Resolution
of a dispute by way of a compromise between two warring
groups, therefore, should attract the immediate and prompt
attention of a Court which should endeavour to give full
effect to the same unless such compromise is abhorrent to
lawful composition of the society or would promote
savagery.”
Having regard to the fact that there were certain financial
transactions between the parties and the disputes have been settled; the
petitioner and the complainant are related to each other; the compromise
(Annexure P-2) has been placed on record; the complainant has endorsed
the factum of compromise and the respondent-State has also supported the
Criminal Misc.20996-M of 2008 4
prayer, this petition is allowed. FIR No.113 dated 31.3.2008 under
Sections 420, 406, 506, 120-B, Indian Penal Code, Police Station, Ambala
Cantt. (Annexure P-1), is quashed.
September 4, 2008 ( AJAI LAMBA ) Kang JUDGE