Malkiat Singh And Ors vs State Of Punjab And Ors on 20 November, 2017

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH

Criminal Misc. No.M-18426 of 2017
Date of Decision: 20.11.2017

Malkiat Singh others
…Petitioner(s)
Versus
State of Punjab others
…Respondent(s)

CORAM:- HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HARI PAL VERMA

Present:- Mr. A.S. Sekhon, Advocate for
for the petitioners.

Mr. M.S. Nagra, AAG, Punjab.
*****

HARI PAL VERMA, J. (Oral)

Prayer in this petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is

for quashing of FIR No.29 dated 05.05.2011 (Annexure P-1) under

Sections 341/326/324/323/506/34 IPC registered at Police Station

Sadiq, District Faridkot and subsequent proceedings arising therefrom

on the basis of compromise by way of affidavit of complainant-

respondent no.2 dated 12.05.2017 (Annexure P-2) and affidavit of

injured-respondent no.3 dated 16.05.2017 (Annexure P-3).

This Court vide order 11.09.2017, had directed the parties

to appear before the Appellate Court to get their statements recorded

1 of 7
23-11-2017 00:20:36 :::
Criminal Misc. No. M-18426 of 2017 -2-

with regard to compromise and learned Appellate Court was directed

to submit its report regarding the genuineness of the compromise on

the basis of statements so recorded.

Pursuant to the order dated 11.09.2017 of this Court, the

parties have appeared before learned Additional District and Sessions

Judge, Faridkot and got their statements recorded. Learned learned

Additional District and Sessions Jude, Faridkot has forwarded her

report dated 25.09.2017 to the effect that the aforesaid statements

have been recorded by the parties voluntarily and their compromise

has been arrived at without any pressure or undue influence from

either side. Thus, the compromise is genuine and valid. The

statements of complainant-respondent no.2 Baldev Singh and injured

respondent no.3 Harpreet Kaur have also been attached with the

report, wherein they stated that the compromise entered into between

them is genuine and they have no objection to the FIR being quashed.

The statement of complainant-respondent no.2 Baldev Singh reads as

under:-

“That we have arrived compromise with accused
persons namely Malkiat Singh, Gurmeet Singh,
Jaswinder Kaur, Rajpal Kaur and Bhinda Sigh @ Binda
@ Bhupinder Singh with the help of respectables. I have
seen my affidavit, same is Annexure P2, received from
Hon’ble High Court alongwith order dated 11.9.2017
where I identify my signatures and admit the contents of
annexure P2 as true and correct. We do not have copy of
original affidavit (compromise as, original has been filed

2 of 7
23-11-2017 00:20:37 :::
Criminal Misc. No. M-18426 of 2017 -3-

with the petition for quashing of the proceedings before
Hon’ble Punjab Haryana High Court).

The compromise has been arrived at, between us out
of our free will and without any coercion, threat, pressure,
greed or fraud. The compromise is for welfare of both the
parties. We do not want to further proceed against
accused persons. We have no objection if the FIR No.29
dated 5.5.2011 u/s 341/326/324/323/506/34 IPC PS Sadiq
and consequent proceedings, arising be quashed against
the accused. I have no objection if the judgment dated
15.12.2016 Annexure P4 be set aside.

Today I have suffered my statement without any
fear, pressure, coercion as per my free will and wish for
the welfare of both the parties. I have brought the original
Adhar Card, the photo-stat copy of the same which bears
my signatures is Annexure C2.”

The similar statement was also made by injured-

respondent no.3 Harpreet Kaur, whereby she has shown no objection

to the FIR being quashed.

Learned State counsel has also not disputed the factum of

the compromise between the parties.

This Court in the case of Sube Singh and another Versus

State of Haryana and another 2013(4) RCR (Criminal) 102 has

considered the compounding of offences at the appellate stage and has

observed that even when appeal against the conviction is pending

before the Sessions Court and parties have entered into a compromise,

the High Court is vested unparallel power under Section 482 Cr.PC to

3 of 7
23-11-2017 00:20:37 :::
Criminal Misc. No. M-18426 of 2017 -4-

quash criminal proceedings at any stage so as to secure the ends of

justice and has observed as under:

“15. The refusal to invoke power under Section 320
CrPC, however, does not debar the High Court from
resorting to its inherent power under Section 482
Criminal Procedure Code and pass an appropriate order
so as to secure the ends of justice.

16. As regards the doubt expressed by the learned Single
Judge whether the inherent power under Section 482
Criminal Procedure Code to quash the criminal
proceedings on the basis of compromise entered into
between the parties can be invoked even if the accused has
been held guilty and convicted by the trial Court, we find
that in Dr. Arvind Barsaul etc. v. State of Madhya
Pradesh Anr., 2008(2) R.C.R. (Criminal) 910 :
(2008)5 SCC 794, the unfortunate matrimonial dispute
was settled after the appellant (husband) had been
convicted under Section 498A Indian Penal Code and
sentenced to 18 months’ imprisonment and his appeal was
pending before the first appellate court. The Apex Court
quashed the criminal proceedings keeping in view the
peculiar facts and circumstances of the case and in the
interest of justice observing that “continuation of criminal
proceedings would be an abuse of the process of law” and
also by invoking its power under Article 142 of the
Constitution. Since the High Court does not possess any
power akin to the one under Article 142 of the
Constitution, the cited decision cannot be construed to
have vested the High Court with such like unparallel
power.

4 of 7
23-11-2017 00:20:37 :::
Criminal Misc. No. M-18426 of 2017 -5-

17. The magnitude of inherent jurisdiction exercisable by
the High Court under Section 482 Criminal Procedure
Code with a view to prevent the abuse of law or to secure
the ends of justice, however, is wide enough to include its
power to quash the proceedings in relation to not only the
non-compoundable offences notwithstanding the bar
under Section 320 Criminal Procedure Code but such a
power, in our considered view, is exercisable at any stage
save that there is no express bar and invoking of such
power is fully justified on facts and circumstances of the
case.

18. xxx xxx

19. xxx xxx

20. xxx xxx

21. In the light of these peculiar facts and circumstances
where not only the parties but their close relatives
(including daughter and son-in-law of respondent No.2)
have also supported the amicable settlement, we are of the
considered view that the negation of the compromise
would disharmonize the relationship and cause a
permanent rift amongst the family members who are living
together as a joint family. Non-acceptance of the
compromise would also lead to denial of complete justice
which is the very essence of our justice delivery system.
Since there is no statutory embargo against invoking of
power under Section 482 Criminal Procedure Code after
conviction of an accused by the trial Court and during
pendency of appeal against such conviction, it appears to
be a fit case to invoke the inherent jurisdiction and strike
down the proceedings subject to certain safeguards.

22. Consequently and for the reasons afore-stated, we
allow this petition and set aside the judgement and order

5 of 7
23-11-2017 00:20:37 :::
Criminal Misc. No. M-18426 of 2017 -6-

dated 16.03.2009 passed in Criminal Case No. 425-1 of
2000 of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hisar, on
the basis of compromise dated 08.08.2011 arrived at
between them and their step-mother respondent No.2
(Smt. Reshma Devi) w/o late Rajmal qua the petitioners
only. As a necessary corollary, the criminal complaint
filed by respondent No.2 is dismissed qua the petitioners
on the basis of above-stated compromise. Resultantly, the
appeal preferred by the petitioners against the above-
mentioned order dated 16.03.2009 would be rendered
infructuous and shall be so declared by the first Appellate
Court at Hisar.”

Similarly, in the case of Baghel Singh Versus State of

Punjab 2014(3) RCR (Criminal) 578 whereby the accused was

convicted under Section 326 IPC and was sentenced to undergo

rigorous imprisonment for two years, the parties entered into

compromise during the pendency of the appeal. This Court while

relying upon the judgment of Lal Chand Versus State of Haryana,

2009 (5) RCR (Criminal) 838 and Chhota Singh Versus State of

Punjab 1997(2) RCR (Criminal) 392 also allowed the compounding

of offence in respect of offence under Section 326 IPC at the appellate

stage with the observation that it will be a starting point in

maintaining peace between the parties, such offence can be

compounded.

In view of the above, when the matter has been

compromised between the parties with the intervention of

6 of 7
23-11-2017 00:20:37 :::
Criminal Misc. No. M-18426 of 2017 -7-

respectables, no useful purpose would be served to continue with the

proceedings before the Appellate Court.

Therefore, while relying upon the aforesaid judgments and

coupled with the fact that the parties have entered into a compromise

and learned Additional Sessions Judge, Faridkot has submitted her

report in support of genuineness of the compromise, the present

petition is allowed and FIR No.29 dated 05.05.2011 (Annexure P-1)

under Sections 341/326/324/323/506/34 IPC registered at Police

Station Sadiq, District Faridkot and subsequent proceedings arising

therefrom are quashed, qua the petitioners, in view of compromise so

arrived between the parties.

Consequently, the impugned judgment of conviction and

order of sentence dated 15.12.2016 passed by the learned Judicial

Magistrate Ist Class, Faridkot are set aside. The appeal preferred by

the petitioners against the aforesaid judgment and order is rendered

infructuous and shall be declared so by the first Appellate Court.

November 20, 2017 ( HARI PAL VERMA )
AK JUDGE

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

7 of 7
23-11-2017 00:20:37 :::

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *