IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

304 CRM-M No.60979-2024 Date of Decision: 03.03.2025 Sunil Kumar & others .....Petitioners Versus State of Punjab & another .....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BHARDWAJ Present: Mr. Manbir Singh Batth, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. J.S.Arora, DAG, Punjab.

Mr.J.S.Johal, Advocate, for Mr.Sauman Singh Gill, Advocate for respondent No.2.

****

RAJESH BHARDWAJ, J. (Oral)

1. Instant petition has been filed seeking quashing of FIR No.0182 dated 07.08.2020, under Sections 323, 324, 325, 148, 149 of IPC (offence under Section 326 added vide rapat No.20 dated 12.08.2020), registered at Police Station Sri Hargobindpur, Police District Batala (Annexure P-1) along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise deed dated 20.11.2024 (Annexure P-2).

2. FIR in question was got registered by complainant-respondent No.2 and the investigation commenced thereon. However, with the intervention of respectables, finally the parties arrived at settlement and they resolved their inter se dispute, which is apparent from Compromise Deed, annexed as Annexure P-2. On the basis of the compromise, petitioners are invoking the inherent power of this Court by praying that continuation of these proceedings would be a futile exercise and an abuse of process of the Court and thus, the FIR in question and all the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom may be quashed in the interest of justice. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that there were 4 accused, however, one of the accused, namely, Gurdayal Singh has expired and thus, the accused persons are 3 in number and the compromise arrived at is not partial.

3. This Court vide order dated 05.12.2024 directed the parties to appear before the Trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate for recording their statements, as contended before the Court, and the Trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate was also directed to send its report.

4. In pursuance to the same, learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Batala has sent the report dated 24.01.2025 to this Court. With the report, he has also annexed the original statement of respondent No.2 namely, Madan Lal-complainant recorded on 08.01.2025; joint statement of petitioners, namely, Sunil Kumar, Jiwan Kumar and Heera Lal recorded on 08.01.2025 and statement of ASI Deepak Kumar recorded on 18.01.2025. On the basis of the statements, learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Batala has concluded in the report that the compromise effected between the parties is with their free will and without any threat, coercion or undue influence from any corner. It has been mentioned therein that the petitioner was not declared as proclaimed offender.

5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, perused the record and the report sent by learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Batala.

6. A bare perusal of statutory provision of the 528 of B.N.S.S. would show that the High Court may make such orders, as may be necessary to give effect to any order under this Code or to prevent abuse of the process of any Court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice. Section 359 B.N.S.S. is equally relevant for consideration, which prescribes the procedure for compounding of the offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.

7. Keeping in view the nature of offences allegedly committed and the fact that both the parties have amicably settled their dispute, the continuation of criminal prosecution would be a futile exercise. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in a number of cases including Narinder Singh and others Versus State of Punjab and another, 2014 (6) SCC 466; B.S.Joshi and others vs State of Haryana and another (2003) 4 Supreme Court Cases 675 followed by this Court in Full Bench case of Kulwinder Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab and another, 2007(3) RCR 1052 have dealt with the proposition involved in the present case and settled the law.

8. Thereafter, Hon'ble Supreme Court in Gian Singh vs State of Punjab and anoth