Ranjit Singh And Others vs State Of Punjab And Another on 13 February, 2009

      In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh

                               Crl. Misc. No. M- 27768 of 2008
                               Date of Decision:February 13, 2009

Ranjit Singh and others
                                            ---Petitioners

                   versus

State of Punjab and another

                                            ---Respondents

Coram:       HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA

                 ***

Present:     Mr. Deepak Aggarwal,Advocate,
             for the petitioners
             Mr. Aman Deep Singh Rai, AAG, Punjab
             Mr.,Veneet Sharma, Advocate,
             for respondent No. 2

                   ***

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 DDR No. 24 dated 20.6.2008 in FIR No. 114 dated 19.6.2008 under

Sections 307, 326, 323, 324,148, 149 of the Indian Penal Code registered at

Police Station, Lopoke District Amritsar (Rural) and all subsequent

proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that it is case of

cross version and petitioners and respondent No. 2, with the intervention

of the panchayat and respectables of the village, have entered into a

compromise and DDR, in question be quashed to enable them to live

peacefully in future.

A perusal of affidavit dated 18.9.2008 (Annexure P-1), reveals

that respondent No.2 does not want to proceed with the cross case got
Crl. Misc. No. M- 27768 of 2008 -2-

registered by him and his party. Respondent No. 2 is present in Court along

with his counsel and has admitted the contents of the affidavit.

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- 27768 of 2008 -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. DDR No. 24

dated 20.6.2008 in FIR No. 114 dated 19.6.2008 under Sections 307, 326,

323, 324,148, 149 of the Indian Penal Code registered at Police Station,

Lopoke District Amritsar and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom

are quashed.

(SABINA)
JUDGE

February 13, 2009
PARAMJIT