The main legal point established in the judgment is the inherent power of the court to quash criminal proceedings based on a voluntary compromise between the parties, while considering the nature and gravity of the offence and the need to prevent abuse of the process of law.

JUDGMENT :

Vinod S. Bhardwaj, J.

By means of the instant petition, prayer is sought for quashing of case FIR No. 141 dated 04.09.2019 under Sections 365 read with Section 34 IPC registered at Police Station Subhanpur, District Kapurthala (Annexure P-1) and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, on the strength of compromise dated 18.09.2019 (Annexure P-2) entered between parties.

2. The case came up for hearing on 06.07.2021, when the parties were directed to appear before the Illaqa Magistrate to get their statements recorded with regard to the genuineness of the compromise and the Illaqa Magistrate was required to submit a report as to whether the compromise have been effected without any undue influence or coercion.

3. The statement of the parties was eventually recorded by the Judicial Magistrate on 06.09.2021 and a report in this regard was furnished. The extract of the said report submitted vide letter No. 466 dated 08.09.2021 is as under:

“In this case, FIR No.141 dated 04.09.2019, under Sections 365, 34 of IPC, PS Subhanpur, District Kapurthala, the statement of complainant Reshma, victim Ajay (deaf and dumb), Bittu and accused Mohamad Sai, Shamdeen, Jasvir Singh and Amandeep Singh were recorded on 06.09.2021, wherein they have stated that they have compromised the mater with each other with their own free will, without any pressure, coercion or any undue influence, Both the parties were duly identified by their respective counsels and also placed on record their Aadhar Cards. Further, as per statement of complainant Reshma none of the accused has been declared Proclaimed offender. It has also been stated by the accused that they are not involved in any other case. The FIR in the present case was lodged at the instance of Reshma wife of Babu Deen resident of village Raipur Rajputtan, Tehsil Bholath, District Kapurthala. It is clear from the statements of the complainant, victim as well as accused persons as well as after their examination in the Court, that they have entered into compromise and solved their differences, without any undue influence, coercion and threat. As such, in my opinion, the parties have entered into compromise voluntarily. The report is accordingly submitted please.”

4. A perusal of the same shows that the parties have amicably resolved their differences and the settlement is voluntarily, without any undue influence, pressure, coercion or threat.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioners points out that the FIR in question had been instituted on the statement of Reshma wife of Babu Deen pertaining to abduction of Ajay by the accused persons. The report has been sent by the Illaqa Magistrate after having recorded the statement of Ajay (the victim) of the offence as well as that of the witness alongwith the accused. Even, the compromise also states that both the parties are related to each other and that the victim Ajay is now staying with the complainant-Reshma.

6. Ms. A.K. Khurana, DAG, Punjab does not raise any objection to the quashing of the FIR considering that as per the report furnished by the Illaqa Magistrate, the parties have resolved their differences voluntarily.

7. Mr. Ritesh Pandey, Advocate for respondents No. 2 to 4 reiterates the existence of the compromise as also the statements made before the Illaqa Magistrate acknowledging the compromise.

8. A perusal of the FIR shows that the offence in question relates to harm against the person of an individual and the same is not in the nature of an offence against the society at large. Besides, the dispute seemingly is amongst the parties that are relatives and the same stands resolved with the intervention of the respectables of the family.

9. The full Bench of this Court in the matter of “Kulwinder Singh and others versus State of Punjab and another” reported as (Punjab and Haryana High Court) : 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052 has been observed as under:

“(27) Shri R.S. Cheema, learned Senior Advocate, who assisted the Bench as Amicus Curiae,