The power to quash a criminal proceeding should be exercised to secure the ends of justice and prevent abuse of the court's process, as established by judicial precedents.

JUDGMENT

Rajesh Bhardwaj, J. (Oral). - Matter has been taken up through video conferencing via Webex facility in the light of the Pandemic Covid-19 situation and as per instructions.

CRM-29534-2021

This is an application seeking preponment of the date in the main petition.

In view of the reasons mentioned in the application and with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, same is allowed. The main petition is preponed from 09.12.2021 and is taken up on Board today itself.

Main Petition Instant petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. praying for quashing of FIR No.223, dated 25.09.2018, under Sections 366, 120-B, 506 IPC (Sections 366 and 120-B IPC removed and Sections 365 and 328 IPC added), at Police Station Sadar Ambala, District Ambala, and all the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise dated 09.03.2021 (Annexure P-3).

FIR in question was got registered by complainant-respondent No.2 and the investigation commenced thereon. However, with the intervention of respectables, finally the parties arrived at settlement and they resolved their inter se dispute, which is apparent from Compromise Deed, annexed as Annexure P-3. On the basis of the compromise, the petitioner is invoking the inherent power of this Court by praying that continuation of these proceedings would be a futile exercise and an abuse of process of the Court and thus, the FIR in question and all the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom may be quashed in the interest of justice.

This Court vide orders dated 19.03.2021 directed the parties to appear before the Area Magistrate/trial Court for recording their statements, as contended before the Court, and the Magistrate/trial Court was also directed to send its report.

In pursuance of the same, learned Additional Sessions Judge- cum-Judge, Special Court, Ambala sent his report dated 20.04.2021 to this Court. With the report he has also annexed the copies of joint statement of Vishav Nath and Neelam, Hem Lata Gupta, and statement of petitioner/accused Karan Kumar recorded on 19.04.2021. On the basis of the statements, learned Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Judge, Special Court, Ambala has concluded in the report that it appears that the parties have entered into a compromise without any pressure or coercion. The marriage between the petitioner and respondent No.3 is also dissolved by decree of divorce under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act on 20.04.2021.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties, perused the record and the report sent by learned Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Judge, Special Court, Ambala A bare perusal of statutory provision of the 482 Cr.P.C. would show that the High Court may make such orders, as may be necessary to give effect to any order under this Code or to prevent abuse of the process of any Court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice. Section 320 Cr.P.C. is equally relevant for consideration, which prescribes the procedure for compounding of the offences under the Indian Penal Code.

Keeping in view the nature of offences allegedly committed and the fact that both the parties have amicably settled their dispute, the continuation of criminal prosecution would be a futile exercise. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in a number of cases including Narinder Singh and others Versus State of Punjab and another, 2014 (6) SCC 466; B.S.Joshi and others vs State of Haryana and another (2003) 4 Supreme Court Cases 675 followed by this Court in Full Bench case of Kulwinder Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab and another, 2007(3) RCR 1052 have dealt with the proposition involved in the present case and settled the law.

Thereafter, Hon'ble Supreme Court in Gian Singh vs State of Punjab and another (2012) 10 Supreme Court Cases 303 further dealt with the issue and the earlier law settled by the Supreme Court for quashing of the FIR in State of Haryana vs Bhajan Lal, 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335. Para 61 of the judgment reads as under:-

“61. The position that emerges from t