In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh
Crl. Misc. No. M- 2108 of 2009
Date of Decision:March 03, 2009
Gurdeep Singh @ Minta and others
---Petitioners
versus
Surinder Singh and another
---Respondents
Coram: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA
***
Present: Mr.Rajesh Hooda,Advocate,
for the petitioners
***
SABINA, J.
Petitioners have filed this petition under Section 482 of the
Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as ‘Cr.P.C.’)for quashing
of FIR No. 240 dated 2.11.2008 under Sections 341, 323/34 of the
Indian Penal Code registered at Police Station,Salem Tabri, Ludhiana on the
basis of compromise.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that now with
the intervention of relatives and friends, parties have arrived at a
compromise dated 16.1.2009(Annexure P-2).
Respondent No. 1 is present in person and is identified by
ASI Balkar Singh, who has come to assist the learned State counsel.
Respondent No. 1 has admitted the contents of the affidavit (Annexure P-2)
wherein it has been stated that he has no objection if the case registered at
his instance is quashed. He does not want to proceed further with the case
Crl. Misc. No. M- 2108 of 2009 -2-
as the parties have arrived at a compromise with the intervention of
respectables and friends.
As per the Full Bench judgment of this Court in Kulwinder
Singh and others vs. State of Punjab, 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052,
High Court has power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to allow the compounding
of non-compoundable offence and quash the prosecution where the High
Court felt that the same was required to prevent the abuse of the process of
any Court or to otherwise secure the ends of justice. This power of
quashing is not confined to matrimonial disputes alone.
Hon’ble the Apex Court in the case of Nikhil Merchant vs.
Central bureau of Investigation and another JT 2008 (9) SC 192 in paras
23 and 24 has held as under:-
“23. In the instant case, the disputes between the Company and
the Bank have been set at rest on the basis of the compromise
arrived at by them whereunder the dues of the Bank have been
cleared and the Bank does not appear to have any further claim
against the Company. What, however, remains is the fact that
certain documents were alleged to have been created by the
appellant herein in order to avail of credit facilities beyond the
limit to which the Company was entitled. The dispute
involved herein has overtones of a civil dispute with certain
criminal facets. The question which is required to be answered
in this case is whether the power which independently lies with
this court to quash the criminal proceedings pursuant to the
compromise arrived at, should at all be exercised?
Crl. Misc. No. M- 2108 of 2009 -3-
24. On an overall view of the facts as indicated hereinabove
and keeping in mind the decision of this Court in B.S.Joshi’s
case (supra) and the compromise arrived at between the
Company and the Bank as also clause 11 of the consent terms
filed in the suit filled by the Bank, we are satisfied that this is a
fit case where technicality should not be allowed to stand in the
way in the quashing of the criminal proceedings, since, in our
view, the continuance of the same after the compromise arrived
at between the parties would be a futile exercise.”
Since the parties have arrived at a compromise, no useful
purpose would be served by continuing the criminal proceedings, in
question.
Accordingly, the present petition is allowed. FIR No. 240
dated 2.11.2008 under Sections 341, 323/34 of the Indian Penal Code
registered at Police Station,Salem Tabri, Ludhiana and all subsequent
proceedings arising therefrom are quashed.
(SABINA)
JUDGE
March 03, 2009
PARAMJIT