Gurvinderbir Singh Sodhi vs State Of Punjab And Anr on 7 February, 2025

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Gurvinderbir Singh Sodhi vs State Of Punjab And Anr on 7 February, 2025

Author: Sandeep Moudgil

Bench: Sandeep Moudgil

                                        Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:018799




231
             IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                          AT CHANDIGARH

                                        CRM-M-55696-2024
                                        DECIDED ON: 07.02.2025
GURVINDERBIR SINGH SODHI
                                                            .....PETITIONER

                                    VERSUS

STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANR
                                                            .....RESPONDENTS

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MOUDGIL

Present:     Mr. S.S. Sandhawalia, Advocate
             for the petitioner.

             Mr. Rajiv Verma, DAG Punjab

             Mr. Tarun Deora, Advocate for respondent No.2.

SANDEEP MOUDGIL, J (ORAL)

This is a petition under Section 528 BNSS, 2023 for quashing of

FIR No.10, dated 12.01.2023 (Annexure P-1), under Sections 420, 406, 465,

466, 468, 471, 120-B, 201, 467 of IPC, 1860, registered at Police Station

Division B, District Police Commissionerate, Amritsar with all the

consequential proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise

dated 25.09.2024 (Annexure P-2).

During the pendency of the dispute, the parties have

compromised the matter and filed the present petition for quashing of FIR.

Vide order dated 08.11.2024, parties were directed to appear

before the Illaqa Magistrate/Trial Court and report with regard to the

genuineness of the compromise was called for.

The report dated 09.12.2024 has been received from Judicial

Magistrate Ist Class, Amritsar, stating that the parties have entered into a

1 of 3
::: Downloaded on – 11-02-2025 01:21:45 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:018799

CRM-M-55696-2024 -2-

compromise, which is genuine, voluntary and without any coercion or undue

influence.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in terms the report

dated 07.12.2024, the petitioner has paid the third installment of Rs.3,25,000/-

to the counsel for the respondent No.2/complainant in Court today itself.

This very fact is not controverted by learned counsel appearing

for respondent No.2/complainant, who endorsed no objection in case the

present FIR is quashed.

Full Bench of this Court in Kulwinder Singh and others vs. State

of Punjab, 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052, has held:-

“The only inevitable conclusion from the above discussion
is that there is no statutory bar under the Cr.P.C. which can
affect the inherent power of this Court under Section 482.
Further, the same cannot be limited to matrimonial cases
alone and the Court has the wide power to quash the
proceedings even in noncompoundable offences
notwithstanding the bar under Section 320 of the Cr.P.C., in
order to prevent the abuse of law and to secure the ends of
justice.

The power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. is to be
exercised Ex-Debitia Justitia to prevent an abuse of process
of Court. There can neither be an exhaustive list nor the
defined para-meters to enable a High Court to invoke or
exercise its inherent powers. It will always depend upon the
facts and circumstances of each case. The power under
Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. has no limits. However, the High
Court will exercise it sparingly and with utmost care and
caution. The exercise of power has to be with
circumspection and restraint. The Court is a vital and an
extra-ordinary effective instrument to maintain and control
social order. The Courts play role of paramount importance

2 of 3
::: Downloaded on – 11-02-2025 01:21:46 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:018799

CRM-M-55696-2024 -3-

in achieving peace, harmony and ever- lasting congeniality
in society. Resolution of a dispute by way of a compromise
between two warring groups, therefore, should attract the
immediate and prompt attention of a Court which should
endeavour to give full effect to the same unless such
compromise is abhorrent to lawful composition of the
society or would promote savagery.”

The legal principles as laid down for quashing of the judgment

were also approved by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of ‘Gian

Singh Versus State of Punjab and another,(2012) 10 SCC 303’. Furthermore,

the broad principles for exercising the powers under Section 482 were

summarized by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of ‘Parbatbhai Aahir

another” (2017) 9 SCC 641′.

It is evident that in view of the amicable resolution of the issues

amongst the parties, no useful purpose would be served by continuation of the

proceedings. The furtherance of the proceedings is likely to be a waste of

judicial time and there appears to be no chances of conviction.

In view of above, FIR No.10, dated 12.01.2023 (Annexure P-1),

under Sections 420, 406, 465, 466, 468, 471, 120-B, 201, 467 of IPC, 1860,

registered at Police Station Division B, District Police Commissionerate, with

all the consequential proceedings arising therefrom, is quashed qua the

petitioner, on the basis of compromise dated 25.09.2024 (Annexure P-2)

The present petition is hereby allowed.

                                               (SANDEEP MOUDGIL)
07.02.2025                                           JUDGE
Meenu

Whether speaking/reasoned       Yes/No
Whether reportable              Yes/No


                                      3 of 3
                   ::: Downloaded on - 11-02-2025 01:21:46 :::