PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH
PANKAJ JAIN, J.
Dhanjeet Singh - Appellant
Vs.
State Of Punjab And Another - Respondent
CRM-M-61097-2023
Decided On : 03-05-2024
JUDGMENT :
Pankaj Jain, J.
By way of present petition, the petitioner is seeking quashing of FIR No. 175 dated 23.10.2017 under Sections 307, 323, 506, 427, 148, 149, 120-B of IPC, 1860, and Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act, 1959, registered at Police Station City Malout, District Shri Muktsar Sahib (Annexure P-1) on the basis of compromise.2. Counsel for the petitioner submits that Section 307 IPC stands deleted later on. He further submits that initially there were four accused. Out of which, two namely Manpreet Singh @ Maana and Bakshish Singh Pradhan have died and one was declared innocent i.e. Shubhdeep Singh.
3. On 05.12.2023, the following order was passed
"Prayer in this petition is for quashing of FIR No. 175 dated 23.10.2017 under Sections 307, 323, 506, 427, 148, 149, 120-B of IPC, 1860, and Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act, 1959, registered at Police Station Malout, District Shri Muktsar Sahib, Annexure P-1, along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise deed dated 15.11.2023, Annexure P-2, arrived at between the parties.
Counsel for the petitioner submits that FIR is an outcome of a minor altercation between the parties, which has been amicably settled by compromise, Annexure P-2.
Notice of motion.
On asking of the Court, Mr. A.PS. Tung, DAG, Punjab, accepts notice on behalf of respondent No. 1-State. As per instructions received by him from HC Jagdish Kumar, he submits that offence under Section 307, IPC, has been deleted. He has instructions to state that 04 persons were named as accused in the FIR, out of which, Manpreet Singh @ Manna and Bakshish Singh, have unfortunately expired and Shubdeep was found innocent. He submits that the petitioner, who is at the sole accused, is involved in some other criminal cases also. Mr. S.P.S. Aulakh, Advocate accepts notice on behalf of respondent No.2 and has filed Power of Attorney, which is taken on record. He admits the factum of compromise.
The parties and Investigating Officer are directed to appear before the Area Magistrate/Trial Court on 15.01.2024 or on any day thereafter as fixed by the court, for getting their statements recorded with regard to the compromise. The Area Magistrate/Trial Court shall submit a report on or before the next date of hearing specifying the following :-
Report of Area Magistrate/Trial Court be awaited for 21.02.2024.
4. Pursuant to the aforesaid order, report from SDJM, Malout dated 12.02.2024 has been received, which is taken on record. As per the report, the Trial Court has recorded as follows
"From the aforesaid statements of the concerned parties, it appears that
(1) Four accused persons namely (1) Dhanjeet Singh son of Bakshish Singh r/o House no.52, ward no.20, Street no.01, Gali Bakshish Pardhan Wali, Near Peer Khana Chowk, Malut, Sri Muktsar Sahib i.e. Petitioner in CRM-M-61097 of 2023 besides Manpreet Singh @ Manna, Bakshish Singh Pradhan and Shubhdeep Singh and nine unknown persons out of whom, Manpreet Singh @ Maana and Bakshish Singh Pradhan have expired before filing of challan and accused Shubhdeep Singh was declared innocent, in investigation, were arrayed as accused in this FIR and only one accused Dhanjeet Singh son of Bakshish Singh r/o House no.52, ward no.20, Street no.01, Gali Bakshish Pardhan Wali, Near Peer Khana Chowk, Malout, Sri Muktsar Sahib i.e. Petitioner in CRM-M-61097 of 2023 has appeared and made statement and none of the named accused is absconding/PO in this case.
(2) Parminder Singh is complainant/injured/aggrieved person and he has appeared and has made the statement in support of compromise.
(3) The case is at the stage of prosecution evidence.
(4) The parties have voluntarily, without any pressure or coercion or undue influence, and out of their free will and consent have entered into the compromise between themselves and have settled the matter amicably and the said compromise seems to be voluntary, genuine and true.
(5) As per statement of parties, no other criminal case
Offences under Section 307 of the IPC and the Arms Act are against society and cannot be quashed on the basis of compromise between the parties.
Serious offences with a social impact, such as those under Section 307 of the IPC and the Arms Act, cannot be quashed on the basis of compromise.
The non-compoundable nature of certain offenses and the societal impact are key considerations in determining the validity of a compromise for quashing criminal proceedings.
The main legal point established is that the nature of offences and the settlement between the parties are crucial factors in determining the quashing of FIRs based on compromise.
Non-compoundable offences with societal impact should not be quashed based solely on compromise.
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.