Dated
Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Anoop Chitkara, J.
Sonu Singh - Appellant - Appellant
Versus
State of Punjab and another - Respondents - Respondent
CRA-S-1019 of 2022
Decided On : 20-03-2023
Compounding of Offence - Quashing of FIR and Consequent Proceedings - 379-B/411 IPC - The court allowed the appeal and quashed the FIR and all subsequent proceedings, setting aside the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 25.04.2022, as the accused and the aggrieved person had compromised the matter and the settlement was found to be genuine and not affecting public peace or tranquillity, moral turpitude, or the social and moral fabric of the society. The court invoked the inherent jurisdiction under section 482 CrPC and the appellate jurisdiction to secure the ends of justice.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant, convicted in a case under sections 379-B/411 IPC, appealed for setting aside the judgment of conviction and order of sentence after the matter was compromised by the accused and the aggrieved person.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the settlement between the accused and the aggrieved person was genuine and not secured through coercion or threats. It concluded that quashing the FIR and consequent proceedings was justified to secure the ends of justice.
Issues: The issues involved the genuineness of the compromise, the impact of the settlement on public peace and tranquillity, and the exercise of inherent powers under section 482 CrPC.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on judicial precedents to establish that the exercise of inherent powers under section 482 CrPC is justified to quash the prosecution in cases where the settlement is genuine and continuing the proceedings would serve no fruitful purpose.
Final Decision: The court allowed the appeal, quashed the FIR and all subsequent proceedings, and set aside the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 25.04.2022, acquitting the appellant.
ANOOP CHITKARA J.
| FIR No. | Dated | Police Station | Sections |
| 21 | 10.05.2019 | Smalsar | 379-B, 411 IPC |
The appellant, arraigned as accused in the above captioned FIR, after conviction has come up before this Court in appeal for setting aside the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 25.04.2022 passed by trial Court.
2. After conviction, the accused and the aggrieved person have compromised the matter and filed an application u/s 320 (5) Cr.P.C. for compounding the offence annexing copy of compromise as Annexure A-1.
3. Counsel for the appellant submits that after the conviction from the trial Court, and matter has been compromised and prayed for setting aside the order of judgment of conviction and order of sentence on the basis of compromise.
4. This court vide order dated 16.01.2023 had asked the parties to appear before trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate/Duty Magistrate for recording their statement and had asked the said court to give its report as per the format. The report reads as follows:
| Name of the reporting Court | Ld. Sessions Judge, Moga |
| Criminal Case no. before trial Court | 24 of 01.07.2021 decided on 25.04.2022 |
| 1. | Names of the complainant/ victims(s)/ aggrieved persons(s) | Pardeep Singh-complainant Hira Singh-victim |
| 2. | Dates on which the statement(s) of the complainant/ victims(s)/ aggrieved persons(s) were recorded | 31.01.2023 |
| 3. | Has the identity of the complainant/ victims(s)/ aggrieved persons(s) been verified? | Yes |
| 4. | Whether all the victims/ all the aggrieved persons have compromised the matter? | Yes |
| 5. | Is there pressure, threat, or coercion upon the victim(s)/ aggrieved person(s)/ complainant? | No |
| 6. | Names of the accused person(s) | As per statement of Investigating officer, ASI Kuldeep Raj No.600/Moga, PS Baghapurana, in the present case four accused were nominated, out of which two were juvenile against whom complaint was filed before Principal Magistrate Juvenile Justice Board, Moga and charge sheet was presented against accused Sonu Singh only, whereas accused Sagar was declared as proclaimed person |
| 7 | Dates on which the statement(s) of the accused persons(s) recorded | 31.01.2023 |
| 8. | Whether all the accused have compromised the matter? If no, then the names of the accused who have compromised. | Only accused Sonu Singh who was convicted in the present case has compromised the matter |
| 9. | Whether proclamation proceedings are pending against any accused? | No |
| 10. | Has the police report been filed or not? | Yes |
| 11. | Notice of accusation /Charges have been framed or not? | Yes |
| 12. | Sections of statutes invoked in the matter | 379-B/411 IPC |
| 13. | Whether the court is satisfied with the genuineness of the compromise? | Yes |
ANALYSIS & REASONING:
5. Despite the severe opposition of the State’s counsel to this compromise, the following aspects would be relevant to conclude this petition:-
a) The accused and the private respondent 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 aggrieved person has willingly consented to the nullification of criminal proceedings;
d) There is no objection from the private respondent 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
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 is that the inherent power under section 482 CrPC can be invoked to quash non-compoundable offences based on a compromise, considering the nature of the offence, the ....
The court's decision emphasized the voluntary nature of the compromise, the impact of the offences on public peace and moral fabric of society, and the exercise of inherent power under section 482 Cr....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the court's exercise of inherent power under S. 482 CrPC to quash the FIR and all subsequent proceedings based on a voluntary compromise, absence o....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C can be invoked to quash the FIR and all consequential proceedings based on a compromise between th....
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....
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