IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Anoop Chitkara, J.
Dilbagh Singh & Ors. – Appellants
Versus
State Of Punjab & Anr. – Respondents
CRM-M No. 53833 of 2021
Decided On : 11-03-2022
Quashing of FIR - Compromise between Accused and Injured - Sections 452, 307, 323, 506, 148, 149 IPC and 25 of Arms Act - The court analyzed the compromise between the accused and the injured, the nature of the settlement, and the impact on public peace and tranquillity. It referred to various judicial precedents to justify the quashing of the FIR and consequent proceedings.
Fact of the Case:
The accused sought quashing of the FIR and all consequential proceedings based on the compromise with the victim. The injured and the accused had amicably settled the matter, and the injured consented to the nullification of criminal proceedings.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the settlement between the accused and the injured was voluntary and not secured through coercion. It concluded that quashing the FIR and consequent proceedings was justified to secure the ends of justice.
Issues: The issues involved the voluntary nature of the settlement, impact on public peace, and the reformatory purpose of criminal jurisprudence.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on judicial precedents to support the quashing of the FIR and all subsequent proceedings based on the voluntary settlement between the parties and the absence of impact on public peace and tranquillity.
Final Decision: The court invoked its inherent jurisdiction under section 482 CrPC and quashed the FIR and all subsequent proceedings, allowing the petition in the terms mentioned.
JUDGMENT
Anoop Chitkara, J.
FIR No. | Dated | Police Station | Sections |
140 | 22.10.2019 | Raja Sansi, District Amritsar (Rural) | 452, 307, 323, 506, 148, 149 IPC and 25 of Arms Act |
1. The petitioner(s), arraigned as accused in the above captioned FIR, has come up before this Court under Section 482 CrPC for quashing of the FIR and all consequential proceedings based on the compromise with the victim(s).
2. During the pendency of the petition, the accused and the injured have compromised the matter, and its copy is annexed with this petition.
3. After that, the petitioner(s)came up before this Court to quash the FIR, and in the quashing petition, the injured have been impleaded as respondent(s).
4. On 17-01-2022, the victim Sukhwant Singh, respondent no. 2, stated before the SDJM Ajnala that there would be no objection if the court quashes this FIR and consequent proceedings. As per the concerned court's report dated 9-2-2022, the parties consented to the quashing of FIR and consequent proceedings without any threat.
ANALYSIS & REASONING:
5. The following aspects would be relevant to conclude this petition: -
a) The accused and the private respondent(s) have amicably settled the matter between them in terms of the compromise deed and the statements recorded before the concerned Court;
b) A perusal of the documents reveal that the settlement has not been secured through coercion, threats, social boycotts, bribes, or other dubious means;
c) The victim has willingly consented to the nullification of criminal proceedings;
d) There is no objection from the private respondents in case present FIR and consequent proceedings are quashed;
e) In the given facts, the occurrence does not affect public peace or tranquillity, moral turpitude or harm the social and moral fabric of the society or involve matters concerning public policy;
f) The rejection of compromise may also lead to ill will. The pendency of trial affects career and happiness;
g) There is nothing on the record to prima facie consider the accused as an unscrupulous, incorrigible, or professional offender;
h) The purpose of criminal jurisprudence is reformatory in nature and to work to bring peace to family, community, and society;
i)The exercise of the inherent power for quashing the FIR and all consequentialproceedings is justified to secure the ends of justice.
6. In the present case, the offences under sections 307, 452, 148 & 149 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) and under Arms Act are not compoundable under Section 320 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC). However, in the facts and circumstances peculiar to this case, the prosecution qua the non-compoundable offences can be closed by quashing the FIR and consequent proceedings.
7. The injured and all the accused had appeared before the Court of JMIC and had stated that they had entered into a compromise. The parties belong to the same village and must be living there for generations and might continue to live, but who knows for how long. In the closely-knit village community, when the parties have buried their hatchets, the continuation of criminal proceedings will not advance the reformative purposes of jurisprudence just for the sake of deterrence.
8. It shall be appropriate to refer to the relevant portions of compromise deed, Annexure P- 3, which is extracted as follows:
'This compromise has been got affected between the parties, since, they belong to the same village and with the intention to end the enmity between them and now both the parties are not having any apprehension of any fight between them in future.'
9. The following aspects would be relevant to conclude this petition: -
a) The accused and the private respondent(s) have amicably settled the matter between them in terms of the compromise deed and the statements recorded before the concerned Court;
b) A perusal of the documents reveal that the settlement has not been secured through coercion, threats, social boycotts, bribes, or other dubious means;
c) The victim has willingly consented to t
DimpeyGujraj v Union Territory
Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab
Himachal Pradesh Cricket Association v State of Himachal Pradesh
State of Madhya Pradesh Vs Laxmi Narayan (2019) 5 SCC 688
Mahesh Chand v State of Rajasthan
Narinder Singh &Ors. vs. State of Punjab &Ors. (2014) 6 SCC 466, ¦ 29
Parbatbhai Aahir v State of Gujarat
Ram Prasad v State of Uttar Pradesh
Recent Apex Judgments (R.A.J.) 549 : (2012)10 SCC 303
Recent Apex Judgments (R.A.J.) 549 : 2012(5) CTC 526 (SC)
Shakuntala Sawhney v Kaushalya Sawhney
State of M.P vs. Laxmi Narayan (2019)5 SCC 688.
State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Dhruv Gurjar
State of Maharashtra vs. Vikram Anantrai Doshi
The main legal point established is that the voluntary settlement between the accused and the injured, the absence of impact on public peace, and the reformatory purpose of criminal jurisprudence jus....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the absence of coercion in a compromise, the societal impact of the offences, and the reformatory purpose of criminal jurisprudence can justif....
The voluntary nature of settlement, absence of impact on public peace, and the reformatory nature of criminal jurisprudence justified the quashing of the FIR and all subsequent proceedings.
The main legal point established is that the court can invoke its inherent jurisdiction under section 482 CrPC to quash criminal proceedings based on a genuine compromise, even for non-compoundable o....
The court emphasized the reformatory purpose of criminal jurisprudence and the need to secure the ends of justice in exercising the inherent power for quashing the proceedings based on a compromise.
The main legal principle established in the judgment is that the inherent power under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure can be invoked to quash criminal proceedings based on an amicable s....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the court's invocation of its inherent power under section 482 CrPC to quash the FIR and all subsequent proceedings based on the compromise, consid....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the exercise of inherent power under Section 482 of CrPC to quash criminal proceedings based on a compromise, considering the nature of the offence....
The main legal point established is that the High Court can invoke its inherent powers under section 482 CrPC to quash criminal proceedings, even for non-compoundable offences, if it deems it necessa....
The Court's decision was based on the principle that the inherent power of the High Court under Section 482 CrPC can be exercised to prevent abuse of the process of any court or to secure the ends of....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.