Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Vikas Bahl, J.
Suraj Singh – Appellant
Versus
State Of Punjab & Anr. – Respondents
CRM-M-37714-2021
Decided On : 05-04-2022
Compromise - Quashing of FIR - Indian Penal Code,1860 (Sections 323, 324, 148, 149, 326, 201) - The court discussed the power of the High Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash criminal proceedings involving non-heinous offences, even post-conviction, based on a genuine and voluntary compromise. It highlighted the need to secure the ends of justice and the discretionary power of the court in evaluating the consequences of the offence and the nature of the compromise.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought quashing of FIR and setting aside of the judgment of conviction and order of sentence based on a compromise. The petitioner was a juvenile at the time of the alleged incident and had been convicted and sentenced, while the other accused were major and had already compromised with the complainant.
Finding of the Court:
The court allowed the petition, quashed the FIR and set aside the judgment and order of sentence, acquitting the petitioner. It emphasized the genuine and voluntary nature of the compromise, the non-heinous nature of the offences, and the absence of coercion or compulsion in the compromise.
Issues: The issues involved the validity of the compromise, the power of the court to quash proceedings post-conviction, and the nature of the offences in relation to the compromise.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the High Court has the power to quash criminal proceedings involving non-heinous offences, even post-conviction, based on a genuine and voluntary compromise. It emphasized the need to secure the ends of justice and the discretionary evaluation of the consequences of the offence and the nature of the compromise.
Final Decision: The court allowed the petition, quashed the FIR, set aside the judgment and order of sentence, and acquitted the petitioner based on the genuine and voluntary compromise.
JUDGMENT
Vikas Bahl, J. (Oral). - The present petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of FIR No. 15 dated 18.01.2018 under Sections 323, 324, 148 and 149 of the Indian Penal Code,1860 (Sections 326 and 201 IPC added later on) as well as for setting aside the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 11.10.2019 passed by the Principal Magistrate, Jevenile Justice Board, Ludhiana vide which the petitioner had been convicted and sentenced to stay at special home for a period of two years and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom qua the petitioner only on the basis of the compromise.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that in the present case, FIR was registered against two named persons and three unnamed persons. The petitioner was named as an accused and the petitioner was a juvenile on the date of the alleged incident and was thus, alone tried and it is further submitted that the petitioner alone has been convicted by the Juvenile Justice Board, Ludhiana vide judgment dated 11.10.2019 (Annexure P-2) and the appeal against the said judgment is pending before the Sessions Judge, Ludhiana. It is further submitted that the other accused are major and the compromise between them and the respondent No. 2 has already been effected and they would subsequently file a separate petition for quashing of the proceedings. It is contended that the compromise in the present case is genuine and bona fide and it will bring about peace and amity between the parties.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further relied upon the judgment dated 29.09.2021 passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Criminal Appeal No. 1489 of 2012 titled Ram Gopal and antoher Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh.
4. Learned counsel for respondent No. 2 has reiterated the fact that the matter has been compromised and has submitted that he has no objection in case the present petition is allowed and the FIR qua the petitioner is quashed and the judgment of conviction is set aside.
5. Learned State counsel has, however, opposed the present petition by stating that the petitioner has already been convicted for the offences as alleged in the FIR.
6. This Court has heard learned counsel for the parties and has perused the paperbook.
7. On 13.09.2021, a Coordinate Bench of this Court was pleased to pass the following order:-
'The matter has been taken up through video conferencing.
Notice of motion.
Mr. J. S. Ghumman, DAG, Punjab and Ms.Renu Soni, Advocate, accept notice on behalf of respondent No.1 and respondent No.2 respectively.
Learned counsel for the petitioner undertakes to supply a complete set of the paper book to learned counsel for the respondents during the course of the day.
Through the present petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. the petitioner seeks quashing of FIR No.15 dated 18.01.2018 registered under Sections 323/324/148/149 IPC (Sections 326 and 201 IPC added later on) at Police Station Payal, District Khanna on the strength of a written compromise dated 02.09.2021 (Annexure P-3) entered into between the parties.
The petitioner as also respondent No.2 through their counsel are directed to appear before the Illaqa Magistrate/Trial Court on 23.09.2021 to get their statements recorded to the effect that the compromise has actually been arrived at between them. After recording of the statements, the Trial Court would furnish to this Court its report alongwith the recorded statements on or before the adjourned date, clearly opining therein with respect to the veracity of the compromise, if any, between the parties.
The Illaqa Magistrate/Trial Court would also apprise this Court whether all the accused are party to the compromise and whether any of the accused have ever been declared proclaimed offender(s) and if is there any other criminal case pending against them.
To await the report of the Illaqa Magistrate/Trial Court adjourned to 02.12.2021.
8. In pursuance of the said order, a report has
The power of the High Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash criminal proceedings involving non-heinous offences, even if the trial has concluded and appeal stands dismissed against conviction, bas....
The High Court's power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash criminal proceedings involving non-heinous offences, even post-conviction, to secure the ends of justice.
The court has the power to quash criminal proceedings based on a genuine and voluntary compromise between the parties, especially in cases involving non-heinous offences or of a private criminal act.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the power of the High Court to quash criminal proceedings based on a genuine and voluntary compromise between the parties, considering the nature a....
The High Court can quash non-compoundable offences under Section 482 if they are personal in nature and the parties have settled their disputes amicably, ensuring no adverse effect on public interest....
High Court can quash non-compoundable FIRs under Section 482 when parties reach amicable settlements, preserving justice and avoiding abuse of process.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
