Back
2023 Supreme(P&H) 2502
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
ANOOP CHITKARA, J.
Nardev Singh Mann @ Bobby Mann – Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab & Anr. – Respondents
CRM-M-48133 of 2022 (O&M)
Decided On : 24-02-2023
Mr. Sant Pal Singh Sidhu, Advocate with Mr. Sarbuland Manu, Advocate; For the Petitioners
For the Respondent: Mr. Aditya Kapoor, AAG, Punjab.
Ms. Sunita Singh Chauhan, Advocate for Respondent no.2.
Headnote:(A) Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Section 482 - Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 - Non-compoundable offences - Compromise between accused and victim leads to FIR quashing - High Court may exercise inherent powers under Section 482 to quash proceedings when continuation serves no judicial purpose - Court emphasizes the importance of societal norms and circumstances surrounding compromise in deciding such cases. (Paras 5-14)
(B) Public Interest - The resolution of disputes in criminal cases through compromise is highlighted, provided no moral turpitude or impact on public peace is evident. (Paras 5-10)
(C) Judicial Precedents - The court cites precedents illustrating the balance between the exercise of inherent power and the nature of offences in determining quashing appropriateness. (Paras 8, 9, 10, 14)
Facts of the case:
The FIR was registered against the petitioner under Sections 3(1)(e) SC/ST Act and 323 IPC. Both the accused and aggrieved have compromised the matter voluntarily before the court, and no coercion was involved (Para 2).
Findings of Court:
The court found that compromising the case does not harm public peace or social fabric, allowing for the quashing of FIR and subsequent proceedings due to the nature of the offences involved (Paras 5-6, 14).
Issues: The court addressed whether to quash the FIR given the non-compoundable nature of the offences in light of the private settlement (Paras 7-9).
Ratio Decidendi: The exercise of inherent jurisdiction allows the court to quash cases even for non-compoundable offences when the continuation of proceedings would be an abuse of power; such decisions need meticulous evaluation of circumstances (Paras 8, 10).
Result: Petition allowed.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. quashing of fir with consent (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. court's observations on compromise validity (Para 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 3. principles of quashing fir under section 482 crpc (Para 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 4. judicial precedents supporting quashing (Para 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 5. final order to quash fir (Para 14) |
JUDGMENT
Anoop Chitkara, J.
| FIR No. | Dated | Police Station | Sections |
| 146 | 10.8.2022 | Vairoke, District Fazilka | 3(1)(e) SC/ST Act and 323 IPC |
The petitioner, 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 aggrieved person.
2. During the pendency of the petition, the accused and the aggrieved person have compromised the matter, and its copy is annexed with this petition as Annexure P-2.
3. After that, the petitioner came up before this Court to quash the FIR, and in the quashing petition, impleading the aggrieved person as respondent.
4. This court had asked the parties to appear before the concerned court and had asked the said court to give its report as per the format. The report reads as follows:
| Name of the reporting Court | Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Jalalabad (w) |
| FIR No. | Dated | Police Station | Sections |
| 146 | 10.8.2022 | Vairoke, District Fazilka | 3(1)(e) SC/ST Act and 323 IPC |
| 1. | Names of the complainant/ victims(s)/ aggrieved persons(s) | Baltej Singh |
| 2. | Dates on which the statement(s) of the complainant/ victims(s)/ aggrieved persons(s) were recorded | 4.1.2023 |
| 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) | Nardev Singh Mann @ Bobby Mann |
| 7. | Dates on which the statement(s) of the accused persons(s) recorded | 4.1.2023 |
| 8. | Whether all the accused have compromised the matter? If no, then the names of the accused who have compromised. | Yes |
| 9. | Whether proclamation proceedings are pending against any accused? | No |
| 10. | Has the police report been filed or not? | No |
| 11. | Notice of accusation /Charges have been framed or not? | No |
| 12. | Sections of statutes invoked in the matter | 323 IPC and 3(1)(s) SC/ST Act |
| 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 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 FIR and all consequential proceedings is justified to secure the ends of justice.
6. Th
