Punjab-Haryana High Court
Ramesh Kumar And Ors vs State Of Punjab And Another on 15 January, 2025
Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:005233
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
300
CRM-M-62580-2024
Decided on :15.01.2025
Ramesh Kumar and others
. . . Petitioners
Versus
State of Punjab and another
. . . Respondent(s)
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH
PRESENT: Mr. Pranav Handa, Advocate for the petitioners.
Mr. Jasdev Singh, DAG, Punjab.
Ms. Dilpreet Kaur, Advocate for
Mr. G.S. Virk, Advocate for respondent No.2.
****
SANJAY VASHISTH, J. (Oral)
1. The present petition under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023, has been
filed by the petitioners, for quashing of FIR No. 14, dated 29.01.2024
(Annexure P-1), for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 324, 307,
427, 148 and 149 IPC, registered at Police Station Division-6, Jalandhar
Rural and all the consequential proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of
compromise dated 06.02.2024 (Annexure P-2).
2. Vide order dated 13.12.2024, the affected parties were directed
to appear before the learned trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate, for getting their
respective statements recorded with regard to the compromise. The trial
Court/Illaqa Magistrate was to submit a report in this regard giving certain
details as enumerated in the said order.
3. Pursuant to the order dated 13.12.2024, passed by this Court,
the parties have appeared before learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jalandhar,
1 of 7
::: Downloaded on – 17-01-2025 04:25:13 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:005233
CRM-M-62580-2024 -2-
and as per report dated 14.01.2025, submitted to this Court, both the parties
have got recorded their respective statements in Court. The operative part of
the report received from learned Court below is as under:-
” After going through the statements made by the parties and I.O., the
report of this court, as directed by the Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High
Court is as under:
Name of the report Court. Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Kalka.
FIR Dated Police Station Sections
No.
14 29.01.2024 Division No.6, 323, 324, 307, 427,
Jalandhar 148 and 149 of IPC
Criminal Case No. before Trial Police report not filed
Court
1. Names of the Davinder Pal
complainant/victims(s)/
aggrieved person(s)
2. Dates on which the 19.12.2024
statement(s) of the
complainant/victim(s)/a
ggrieved persons(s)
recorded.
3. Has the identity of the Yes.
complainant/victim(s)/a
ggrieved person(s) been
verified?
4. Whether all the Yes
victims/all the
aggrieved persons have
compromised the
matter?
5. Is there pressure, No.
threat, or coercion
upon the
victim(s)/aggrieved
person(s)/complainant?
6. Names of the accused 1. Ramesh Kumar,
person(s). 2. Rohit Bali
3. Kishan Bali
4.Rajesh Kumar
5. Sahil Kumar
7. Dates on which the 19.12.2024
statement(s) of the
accused person(s)
recorded.
8. Whether all the accused Yes.
have compromised the
2 of 7
::: Downloaded on – 17-01-2025 04:25:14 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:005233
CRM-M-62580-2024 -3-
matter? If no, then the
names of the accused
who have compromised
9. Whether proclamation No
proceedings are
pending against any
accused?
10. Has the police report No
has been filed or not?
11. Notice of No.
accusation/charges
have been framed or
not?
12. Sections of statutes 323, 324, 307, 427, 148 and 149 IPC
invoked in the matter
13. Whether the court is Yes
satisfied with the
genuineness of the
compromise?
”
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that although the
FIR was registered under Section 307 IPC, and same is arguable point to say
that the injury was not that dangerous which may cause death and therefore,
applicability of Section 307 IPC would be a moot question. He also submits
that the medical examination of the victim/injured is from private hospital.
Learned counsel for the petitioners further urged that due to
intervention of the respectable and elderly people of the society, the matter
has been resolved and private parties have effected a compromise dated
06.02.2024 (Annexure P-2).
At present, there remains no dispute amongst the private parties.
He further submits that in view of the compromise so effected between the
private parties, pendency of the impugned FIR and consequential
proceedings emanating therefrom would be sheer abuse of the process of law.
5. Learned State counsel as also learned counsel for respondent
No.2, after going through the statements and the report received from learned
3 of 7
::: Downloaded on – 17-01-2025 04:25:14 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:005233
CRM-M-62580-2024 -4-
Court below, very fairly admit that the private parties have resolved their
dispute and effected a compromise and that they have no objection if the
impugned FIR and all the consequential proceedings are quashed on the basis
of the compromise.
6. The Full Bench of this Court in the matter of Kulwinder Singh
and others v. State of Punjab and another, 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal)
1052, has observed as under:
“(28) To conclude, it can safely be said that there can
never be any hard and fast category which can be prescribed to
enable the Court to exercise its power under Section 482 of the
Cr.P.C. The only principle that can be laid down is the one
which has been incorporated in the Section itself, i.e., “to
prevent abuse of the process of any Court” or “to secure the
ends of justice”.
(29) In Mrs. Shakuntala Sawhney v. Mrs. Kaushalya
Sawhney and others, Hon’ble Krishna Iyer, J. aptly summoned
up the essence of compromise in the following words:
“The finest hour of justice arrives
propitiously when parties, despite falling apart,
bury the hatchet and weave a sense of fellowship of
reunion.”
(30) The power to do complete justice is the very essence
of every judicial justice dispensation system. It cannot be diluted
by distorted perceptions and is not a slave to anything, except to
the caution and circumspection, the standards of which the
Court sets before it, in exercise of such plenary and unfettered
power inherently vested in it while donning the cloak of
compassion to achieve the ends of justice.
(31) No embargo, be in the shape of Section 320(9) of
the Cr.P.C., or any other such curtailment, can whittle down the
power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C.
(32) The compromise, in a modern society, is the sine
qua non of harmony and orderly behaviour. It is the soul of
justice and if the power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. is used
to enhance such a compromise which, in turn, enhances the
social amity and reduces friction, then it truly is “finest hour of
justice”. Disputes which have their genesis in a matrimonial
discord, landlord-tenant matters, commercial transactions and
other such matters can safely be dealt with by the Court by
4 of 7
::: Downloaded on – 17-01-2025 04:25:14 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:005233
CRM-M-62580-2024 -5-
exercising its powers under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. in the
event of a compromise, but this is not to say that the power is
limited to such cases. There can never be any such rigid rule to
prescribe the exercise of such power, especially in the absence
of any premonitions to forecast and predict eventualities which
the cause of justice may throw up during the course of a
litigation.
(33) 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 non-compoundable 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.
(34) 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 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.”
7. The legal principles as laid down for quashing of the criminal
proceedings were also approved by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Gian
Singh v. 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 Parbatbhai Aahir @
Parbatbhai Bhimsinhbhai Karmur and others v. State of Gujarat and
another, (2017) 9 SCC 641.
5 of 7
::: Downloaded on – 17-01-2025 04:25:14 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:005233
CRM-M-62580-2024 -6-
8. Further, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held in Ramgopal and
another v. State of Madhya Pradesh, 2021 SCC Online SC 834, that the
matters which can be categorized as personal in nature or in the matter in
which the nature of injuries do not exhibit mental depravity or commission of
an offence of such a serious nature that quashing of which would override
public interest, the Court can quash the FIR in view of the settlement arrived
at amongst the parties. The observation of the Hon’ble Supreme Court is
extracted as under:-
“19. We thus sum-up and hold that as opposed to Section
320 Cr.P.C. where the Court is squarely guided by the
compromise between the parties in respect of offences
‘compoundable’ within the statutory framework, the extra-
ordinary power enjoined upon a High Court under Section 482
Cr.P.C. or vested in this Court under Article 142 of the
Constitution, can be invoked beyond the metes and bounds of
Section 320 Cr.P.C. Nonetheless, we reiterate that such powers
of wide amplitude ought to be exercised carefully in the context
of quashing criminal proceedings, bearing in mind: (i) Nature
and effect of the offence on the conscious of the society; (ii)
Seriousness of the injury, if any; (iii) Voluntary nature of
compromise between the accused and the victim; & (iv) Conduct
of the accused persons, prior to and after the occurrence of the
purported offence and/or other relevant considerations.”
9. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and going through
the material available on record, this Court finds that there appears to be
substance in the submission of learned counsel for the petitioners that
pendency of the present criminal litigation would be abuse of process of law
since the chances of conviction of the petitioners are bleak in view of the
compromise so effected between the private parties.
6 of 7
::: Downloaded on – 17-01-2025 04:25:14 :::
Neutral Citation No:=2025:PHHC:005233
CRM-M-62580-2024 -7-
10. The report alongwith statements of the affected parties received
from learned Court below would reveal that the aggrieved person has
genuinely effected a compromise with the petitioners and he has no objection
if the impugned FIR and consequential proceedings are quashed.
11. Keeping in view totality of the facts and circumstances of the
case and taking into consideration the ratio of the judgments in the cases of
Gian Singh (supra), Ramgopal (supra) and Kulwinder Singh (supra), this
petition is accepted and FIR No. 14, dated 29.01.2024 (Annexure P-1), for
the offences punishable under Sections 323, 324, 307, 427, 148 and 149 of
IPC, registered at Police Station Kalka, District Panchkula, and all the
consequential proceedings arising therefrom are hereby quashed qua the
petitioners, in view of compromise dated 06.02.2024 (Annexure P-2).
12. Petition stands disposed of.
(SANJAY VASHISTH)
JUDGE
January 15, 2025
rashmi
Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No
Whether Reportable: Yes/No
7 of 7
::: Downloaded on – 17-01-2025 04:25:14 :::