The main legal point established in the judgment is that the power of the High Court to quash criminal proceedings based on a compromise between the parties should be exercised in accordance with the nature and gravity of the crime, the impact on society, and the possibility of conviction, as outlined in the guidelines from the case of 'Gian Singh Versus State of Punjab'.

JUDGMENT :

MAHABIR SINGH SINDHU, J.

Present petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of FIR No.149 dated 04.09.2018 (P-1), under Sections 353, 186, 294, 500, 506 & 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, registered at Police Station, Navi Baradari, Jalandhar, District Police Commissionerate, Jalandhar along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise dated 31.07.2023 (P-2), entered into between the parties i.e. petitioners as well as respondent No.2.

(2) Above FIR was registered on the basis of statement made by respondent No.2-Sukhwinder Pal Singh with the allegations that both the petitioners hurled filthy abuses to the complainant and petitioner No.2 also manhandled him.

(3) This Court, while issuing notice of motion on 07.08.2023, passed the following order:-

“Contends, inter alia, that matter has been compromised between the parties.

(2) Notice of motion.

(3) On asking of the Court, Mr. Joginder Pal Ratra, Sr. DAG, Punjab accepts notice on behalf of respondent No.1/State.

(4) Mr. Navraj Singh, Advocate, who is present in the Court, has filed power of attorney on behalf of respondent No.2. The same is taken on record. He acknowledged the factum of compromise dated 31.07.2023 (P-2) arrived at between the parties at their own level.

(5) Requisite number of copies of the petition be supplied to learned Counsel for the respondents during the course of day.

(6) Petitioners shall file his affidavit that there is no other criminal case(s) pending against them and also give the details of any other FIR(s), already quashed on the basis of compromise.

(7) In view of the above, let parties appear before the Court of learned Illaqa Magistrate/trial Court on 24.08.2023 for recording their statement(s) with reference to the compromise, if any, entered into between them.

(8) Learned Illaqa Magistrate/trial Court shall record the statement(s) of all accused, complainant/injured and victim, if any, and submit a report to this Court before the next date of hearing containing the following information:-

(i). Whether the statements of the parties are bona fide and not result of any pressure or coercion etc. in any manner?

(ii). Whether the compromise effected between the parties is genuine and valid?

(iii). Whether all the accused, complainant and injured are party to the compromise and if not, the details/particulars of such person(s)?

(iv). Whether any other case is pending against either of the parties or not, if yes, the details thereof?

(v). Whether any of the persons involved in this case/dispute has been declared a proclaimed offender?

(vi). Whether any of the petitioner(s) is/are previous convict or not?

(9) List before this Court on 12.09.2023 for further consideration.

(10) Meanwhile, learned State Counsel shall also get the instructions in the matter as to whether the State has any objection?

(11) Copy of this order be sent to learned Judicial Officer concerned forthwith for information and strict compliance.”

(4) In terms of aforesaid order, the statements of both the parties were recorded by learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Jalandhar and submitted a report dated 05.09.2023. The operative part of the same reads as under:-

“I. The statements of the parties are bona fide and not result of any pressure or coercion etc. in any manner.

II. The compromise effected between the parties is genuine and valid.

III. As per the statement of IO there are two persons arrayed as accused in the FIR.

IV. As per record, no other case is pending against either of the parties.

V. As per the statement of IO, no accused are PO in the present case.

VI. As per the statement of IO, none of the accused has been previously convicted.”

(5) A perusal of the aforesaid report clearly reveals that matter has been compromised by both sides i.e. petitioners as well as private respondent(s) with their free consent, voluntarily and without any coercion or undue influence. Even before this Court also, there is no grievance shown by ei