SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2022 Supreme(P&H) 733

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Sanjay Vashisth, J.
Neha & Anr. – Appellants
Versus
State Of Haryana & Anr. – Respondents
CRM-M-29731-2022
Decided On : 19-09-2022

Advocates:
Mr. Ram Darshan yadav, Advocate for the petitioners., for the Appellant; Mr. Vikas Bhardwaj, AAG, Haryana. Mr. Ajit Kumar Sharma, Advocate for respondent No.2., for the Respondent

The court emphasized the power of the court to quash proceedings to prevent abuse of process of law and secure the ends of justice, especially in cases of compromise between the parties.

Headnote:

Section 482 - Quashing of FIR - IPC 420 - Summary of Acts and Sections: Section 482 of the Cr.P.C., Section 420 of IPC - The court referred to the legal principles laid down in the cases of Kulwinder Singh v. State of Punjab, Mrs. Shakuntala Sawhney v. Mrs. Kaushalya Sawhney, Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, Parbatbhai Aahir @ Parbatbhai Bhimsinhbhai Karmur v. State of Gujarat, and Ramgopal v. State of Madhya Pradesh. The court emphasized the power of the court to quash proceedings to prevent abuse of process of law and secure the ends of justice, especially in cases of compromise between the parties.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioners filed a petition under Section 482, Cr.P.C., seeking to quash FIR No. 323, dated 29.09.2021, for the offences punishable under Section 420 of IPC, based on a compromise dated 29.06.2022. The affected parties appeared before the trial Court and got their statements recorded with regard to the compromise.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the compromise between the private parties was genuine and entered into with their free will and consent, and that the pendency of the criminal litigation would be an abuse of process of law. The court accepted the petition and quashed the FIR and consequential proceedings in view of the compromise.

Issues: The main issue was whether the pendency of the criminal litigation based on the FIR would be an abuse of process of law in view of the compromise between the private parties.

Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the legal principles laid down in various cases to emphasize the power of the court to quash proceedings to prevent abuse of process of law and secure the ends of justice, especially in cases of compromise between the parties.

Final Decision: The petition was accepted, and FIR No. 323, dated 29.09.2021, for the offences punishable under Section 420 of IPC, and all consequential proceedings were quashed in view of the compromise dated 29.06.2022.

JUDGMENT

Sanjay Vashisth, J. - The present petition under Section 482, Cr.P.C., has been filed by the petitioners, for quashing of FIR No. 323, dated 29.09.2021 (Annexure P-1), for the offences punishable under Section 420 of IPC, at Police Station Dharuhera, District Rewari, and all the consequential proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise dated 29.06.2022 (Annexure P-2).

2. Vide order dated 14.07.2022, the affected parties were directed to appear before the learned trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate, for getting their respective statements recorded with regard to the compromise. The trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate was to submit a report in this regard giving certain details as enumerated in the said order.

3. Pursuant to the order dated 14.07.2022, passed by this Court, the parties have appeared before learned Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rewari, and as per report dated 16.08.2022, submitted to this Court, both the parties have got recorded their respective statements in Court. The operative part of the report received from learned Court below is as under:-

    '4. The Statements of the parties and the statement of the Investigating Officer SI Suresh Kumar, No.528/Rewari, PP Meerpur, P.S.Dharuhera, in original are hereby forwarded to your honour for your honour's kind perusal. It is pertinent here to mention that the compromise entered into between the present parties appears to be genuine and entered into with their free will and consent and without any fear or pressure of any kind. It is also pertinent here to mention that as per the statement of the Investigating Officer, SI Suresh Kumar, No.528/Rewari, PP Meerpur, P.S.Dharuhera, Rewari the present FIR was registered against two accused persons namely Neha daughter of Azad Singh and Vijay son of Bijender and none of the above named accused have been declared proclaimed offender in any case and the present case is at the stage of investigation and the accused are yet to join the investigation of the present case and there is only one complainant namely Yashwani son of Sunder Singh and all the accused persons as well as the complainant are party to the present compromise.

    The report is hereby submitted for your honour's kind perusal and necessary action as your honour may deem fit. '

    4. Learned counsel for the petitioners urged that due to intervention of the respectable and elderly people of the society, the matter has been resolved and private parties have effected a compromise dated 29.06.2022 (Annexure P-2). At present, there remains no dispute amongst the private parties. He further submits that in view of the compromise so effected between the private parties, pendency of the impugned FIR and consequential proceedings emanating therefrom would be sheer abuse of the process of law.

    5. Learned State counsel as also learned counsel for respondent No. 2, after going through the statements and the report received from learned Court below, very fairly admit that the private parties have resolved their dispute and effected a compromise and that they have no objection if the impugned FIR and all the consequential proceedings are quashed on the basis of the compromise.

    6. The Full Bench of this Court in the matter of Kulwinder Singh and others v. State of Punjab and another, 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052, has observed as under:

      '(28) To conclude, it can safely be said that there can never be any hard and fast category which can be prescribed to enable the Court to exercise its power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. The only principle that can be laid down is the one which has been incorporated in the Section itself, i.e., "to prevent abuse of the process of any Court" or "to secure the ends of justice'.

      (29) In Mrs. Shakuntala Sawhney v. Mrs. Kaushalya Sawhney and others, Hon'ble Krishna Iyer, J. aptly summoned up the essence of compromise in the following words:

        'The finest hour of justice arrives propitiously when parties, despite falling apart, bury the hatchet and weave a s

          Click Here to Read the rest of this document
          1
          2
          3
          4
          5
          6
          7
          8
          9
          10
          11
          SupremeToday Portrait Ad
          supreme today icon
          logo-black

          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

          qr

          Scan Me!

          India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

          For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

          whatsapp-icon Back to top