CRM-M No.31442 IN THE 278 Harpreet Singh a State of Punjab CORAM : HON Present: Mr. Mr. for t Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. for r *** NAMIT KUMA 1. The 482 Cr.P.C. for Sections 406, Commissionerate proceedings arisi (Annexure P-2) e 2. Lear may be quashed a 31442 of 2024 -1- THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB CHANDIGARH CRM-M Date of De ingh and another Versus and another HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAMIT Mr. Pramod Bhardwaj, Advocate for Mr. Amit Kaushik, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Anup Singh, AAG, Punjab. Mr. Prashant Vashist, Advocate Mr. Girender Singh, Advocate Mr. Vikramjeet Singh, Advocate for respondent No.2. *** UMAR, J. (ORAL) The present petition has been filed b for quashing of FIR No.58 dated 406, 498-A IPC at Police Statio nerate, Ludhiana (Annexure P-1) s arising therefrom on the basis of c ) executed between the parties. Learned counsel for the parties hav ashed as the parties have amicably sett JAB AND HARYANA AT ARH M No.31442 of 2024 e of Decision:30.01.2025 ... Petitioners ... Respondents AMIT KUMAR for filed by the petitioner under Section dated 13.06.2021 registered under Station Women, District Police 1) and all other subsequent is of compromise dated 28.03.2024 ies have stated that the present FIR ly settled the dispute. s ction nder olice uent 2024 FIR PANKAJ KUMAR 2025.01.31 12:15 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court Chandigarh CRM-M No.31442 3. Duri directed to record genuineness and 4. In c Judicial Magistra District & Sessio has been mentio influence or coer 5. The State of Punjab Division Bench Haryana and compounding of proceedings of th case of involving 6. An Court in case Gia (Criminal) 543 under:- “57. sum crim inhe to a 320 statu guid justi case F.I.R 31442 of 2024 -2- During the course of preliminary record the statements of all the concer ss and validity of the compromise by th In compliance thereof, report dat agistrate 1st Class, Ludhiana has been Sessions Judge, Ludhiana, with statem entioned that the compromise is gen r coercion from any side. The Hon'ble Full Bench of this Cou njab and another, 2007(3) RCR ( ench of this Court in case Sube Sin nd another, 2013(4) RCR (Cr ing of offence can be allowed ev s of the appeal against conviction pen olving non-compoundable offence. An identical question came to be Gian Singh Versus State of Punja ) 543. Having interpreted the relevan 57. The position that emerges from summarised thus: the power of th criminal proceeding or FIR or inherent jurisdiction is distinct and to a criminal court for compoundi 320 of the Code. Inherent power statutory limitation but it has to be guideline engrafted in such power justice or (ii) to prevent abuse of the cases power to quash the crimina F.I.R. may be exercised where the o inary hearing, the trial Court was concerned parties, with regard to the e by this Court. rt dated 07.01.2025 from learned s been received through the office of statements of the parties, in which, it is genuine and there was no undue is Court in case Kulwinder Singh vs. CR (Criminal) 1052 and Hon'ble e Singh and another vs. State of (Criminal) 102 observed that ed even after conviction, during on pending in Sessions Court and in to be decided by Hon'ble Supreme unjab and another, 2012(4) RCR relevant provisions, it was ruled as from the above discussion can be of the High Court in quashing a or complaint in exercise of its and different from the power given unding the offences under Section wer is of wide plenitude with no to be exercised in accord with the wer viz; (i) to secure the ends of f the process of any Court. In what inal proceeding or complaint or he offender and victim have settled was o the rned ce of ch, it ndue vs. n'ble of that uring nd in reme CR d as be a its ven ion no the of hat or led PANKAJ KUMAR 2025.01.31 12:15 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court Chandigarh CRM-M No.31442 their case of su and depr fittin offen natu com offen or t invo over diffe offen part matr wro have Cou the conv wou inju case victi wou with proc settl and crim ques its ju 7. The Narinder Singh (Criminal) 482. 8. Hav and the fact that and on that basis for quashing the intervention of t 31442 of 2024 -3- their dispute would depend on the fa case and no category can be prescri of such power, the High Court must and gravity of the crime. Heinous a depravity or offences like murder, fittingly quashed even though the vi offender have settled the dispute. Su nature and have serious impact compromise between the victim an offences under special statutes like or the offences for any basis for q involving such offences. But overwhelmingly and pre-dominati different footing for the purposes offences arising from commercial partnership or such like transaction matrimony relating to dowry etc. or wrong is basically private or perso have resolved their entire dispute. I Court may quash criminal proceed the compromise between the offende conviction is remote and bleak and would put accused to great oppress injustice would be caused to him case despite full and complete settle victim. In other words, the High C would be unfair or contrary to the with the criminal proceeding or proceeding would tantamount to ab settlement and compromise betwee and whether to secure the ends of criminal case is put to an end an question(s) is in affirmative, the Hi its jurisdiction to quash the criminal The same view has been reiterated ngh and others Vs. State of Punja ) 482. Having regard to the contentions of t that both the parties to the litigation t basis, the present petition under Sect ng the present FIR. The compromise n of the respectables and family m he facts and circumstances of each escribed. However, before exercise must have due regard to the nature ous and serious offences of mental der, rape, dacoity, etc. cannot be e victim or victim's family and the e. Such offences are not private in pact on society. Similarly, any m and offender in relation to the like Prevention of Corruption Act or quashing criminal proceedings ut the criminal cases having inatingly civil flavour stand on ses of quashing, particularly the rcial, financial, mercantile, civil, tions or the offences arising out of c. or the family disputes where the ersonnel in nature and the parties te. In this category of cases, High ceedings if in its view, because of fender and victim, the possibility of and continuation of criminal case ression and prejudice and extreme him by not quashing the criminal ettlement and compromise with the h Court must consider whether it the interest of justice to continue or continuation of the criminal to abuse of process of law despite tween the victim and wrongdoer s of justice, it is appropriate that d and if the answer to the above e High Court shall be well within inal proceeding.” iterated by the Apex Court in case unjab and another, 2014(2) RCR ons of learned counsel for the parties gation have entered into compromise r Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed romise has been arrived at with the ily members and the parties have ch ise ure tal be the in ny the Act ngs ing on the vil, t of the ties igh of of ase me nal the r it ue nal ite oer hat ove hin case CR rties mise filed the have PANKAJ KUMAR 2025.01.31 12:15 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court Chandigarh CRM-M No.31442 decided to keep h it would be in the matter. Moreove the settlement of be accepted in th 9. In v the impugned FIR A IPC at Police (Annexure P-1) hereby quashed, January 30, 202 Pankaj* 31442 of 2024 -4- keep harmony between them and to liv e in the interest of justice that parties a reover, learned counsel for the partie ent of disputes between the parties, th d in this context. In view of above, the instant petiti FIR No.58 dated 13.06.2021 regist Police Station Women, District Polic 1) and all other consequential proc shed, on the basis of compromise, qua , 2025 Whether speaking/reasoned Whether reportable d to live peacefully in future. Hence, arties are allowed to compromise the parties are ad idem that, in view of ties, the present petition deserves to t petition is allowed. Consequently, registered under Sections 406, 498- Police Commissionerate, Ludhiana al proceedings arising therefrom are se, qua the petitioners only. (NAMIT KUMAR) JUDGE ned : Yes/No : Yes/No ence, e the w of es to ntly, - iana are PANKAJ KUMAR 2025.01.31 12:15 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Punjab and Haryana High Court Chandigarh