In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh
Crl. Misc. No. M- 35915 of 2005
Date of Decision:March 03, 2009
Sukhwinder Singh
---Petitioner
versus
State of Punjab and another
---Respondents
Coram: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA
***
Present: Mr.S.S.Rangi,Advocate,
for the petitioner
Mr. Aman Deep Singh Rai, AAG, Punjab
Mr.H.S.Tuli, Advocate,
for respondent No. 2
***
SABINA, J.
Sukhwinder Singh-petitioner has filed this petition under
Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as
‘Cr.P.C.’)for quashing of FIR No.63 dated 13.4.2004 under Sections
363,366 of the Indian Penal Code registered at Police Station, Payal,
district Ludhiana.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the parties
have resorted their differences. Petitioner has got married with Baljit
Kaur on 3.4.2004. Respondent No. 2 is the father of said Baljit Kaur.
Respondent No. 2 is present in person in Court along with his
counsel. Reply on behalf of respondent No. 2 has been filed in court today.
As per the same, differences have been sorted out between the parties and
Crl. Misc. No. M- 35915 of 2005 -2-
he has no objection if the FIR, in question is quashed.
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?
24.On an overall view of the facts as indicated hereinabove
Crl. Misc. No. M- 35915 of 2005 -3-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.”
Although the FIR, in question has been registered under
Sections 363, 366 of the Indian Penal Code, but since the petitioner has got
married with the daughter of complainant-respondent No. 2, no useful
purpose would be served by continuing the criminal proceedings, in
question.
Accordingly, the present petition is allowed. FIR No.63 dated
13.4.2004 under Sections 363,366 of the Indian Penal Code registered at
Police Station, Payal, district Ludhiana. and all subsequent proceedings
arising therefrom are quashed.
(SABINA)
JUDGE
March 03, 2009
PARAMJIT