SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Kulwant Singh vs State Of Punjab And Another on 14 May, 2019

S.No.287
INTHEHIGHCOURTOFPUNJABANDHARYANA
ATCHANDIGARH
****

CRM-M-12936of2019(OM)
DateofDecision:14.05.2019

KulwantSingh…..Petitioner

Vs.

StateofPunjabandanother…..Respondents

CORAM:-HON’BLEMR.JUSTICERAJBIRSEHRAWAT

Present:-Mr.RajeevSharma,Advocate
forthepetitioner.

Mr.PrabhjotSinghWalia,AAG,
Punjab.

Mr.RajuArora,Advocatefor
complainant-respondentNo.2.

****

RajbirSehrawat,J.(Oral)

ThispetitionunderSection482oftheCodeofCriminal

ProcedurehasbeenfiledforquashingofFIRNo.71dated14.06.2018

registeredunderSections406IPC(Sections420and201SectionIPCaddedlater

on)atPoliceStationKoomkalan,TehsilandDistrictLudhianaandall

consequentialproceedingsarisingtherefrom,onthebasisofcompromise.

Videorderdated20.03.2019,thepartiesweredirectedto

appearbeforethelearnedtrialCourt/IllaqaMagistrate,forgettingtheir

statementsrecorded;astothegenuinenessofthecompromise.In

compliancethereof,reportofJudicialMagistrateIstClass,Ludhiana,dated

10.04.2019hasbeenreceived,wherein,ithasbeennoticedthatthematter

hasbeencompromisedwiththeinterventionofrespectablesandfriendsof

boththeparties,compromisehasbeeneffectedwiththeirfreeconsentand

withoutanypressureorundueinfluencefromanyquarter.

1of6
09-06-201907:07:18:::
CRM-M-12936of2019(OM)-2-

Theultimateaim,objectiveandgoalofalegalsystemisto

reconcilethesocialconflicts.Lawisrequiredonlytoensurethatpeopledo

nothavetofightwitheachotherjusttoprotecttheirrighttoproperty,right

tolifeandlibertyandotherrightssecuredtothembythelegalsystem.The

civildisputesaretheconflictsbetweentwoparties,havinglesserovertones

forthesocialorder,socialharmonyorthesocietyassuch.Henceabsolute

freedomisgiventothepartiestosettletheirdisputesbycompromises,of

course,comingwithcertainlegalconsequencesaswell.However,the

criminaldisputesdonotnecessarilyrestrictthemselvestoonlytwoparties

tothedisputeintermsoftheirscope,consequencesandeffect.Thecriminal

actstendtocasttheireffectandconsequencesevenuponthesocietyat

large.Therefore,thelawprescribespunishment,severepunishmentsandthe

extremepunishments,includingdeathpenaltyforcriminalacts.

Howevermoreoftenthennotthecivildisputesorinter-se

conflictsoftwopartiestransformsthemselvesintocriminalaspect.

Therefore,thelegalsystemplaysempiretoresolvetheconflictbetweentwo

parties;withtheaddedtaskofensuringthattheadverseimpactofdispute

quasocietyatlargeisminimized.Butstillthecoreideaistoresolvethe

conflictbetweentwosidesbyputtingittorest.Therefore,eventhecriminal

lawisrequiredtogivedueregardtothewishesofthepartiestodispute.

Recognizingthisprincipleonly,theIndianlegalSystemalsoprovidesfor

recognizingthecompromisebetweentwosidesofacriminaldispute.

Section320Cr.P.C.isanexpressprovisioninthisregard.Thissectionnot

onlyprovidesforcompoundingduringthetrial,butpermitscompounding

evenatappellateorrevisionalstage.Howeverbyitsverynatureandscope,

Section320Cr.P.C.cannotbethesolerepository;whereintherecognition

2of6
09-06-201907:07:19:::
CRM-M-12936of2019(OM)-3-

toacompromisebetweenthepartieshave;necessarily;tobeconfined.This

sectionrelatesonlytotheoffencesprescribedunderSectiontheIndianPenalCode.

TherearealotmoreoffencesprescribedoutsideSectionIPC.Eventotheoffences

existingintheSectionIPCnewdimensionsareaddedfromtimetotime,makingthe

existingoffencestobelighterorstringentandevennewmodalitiesofproof

ofoffencesarebeingrecognisedinviewoftechnologicaladvancement.

ThisnecessitatesandrequirestheneedforlookingbeyondSection320

Cr.P.C.torecognisethecompromisebetweenthepartiestodispute.Butto

maintainthesanctityoftheprocedureprescribedforcriminaltrial;theTrial

Courtcannotbepermittedtotravelbeyondthescopeprescribedunderthat

procedure.HencetheneedforinvokingSection482Cr.P.C.bytheHigh

Court.

But,asobservedabove,thewishesofonlypartiestothe

criminaldisputewouldnotalwaysbesufficienttoterminateacriminaltrial

inviewofthepatent,latentorsubtleeffect;theirconductwouldhaveleft

quathesocietyatlarge.Thereforetheoffencescommittedbypersons

involvedingovernanceoradministrationforacquiringofficialpoweror

whileexercisingofficepowercannotbepermittedtobecompromised.

Likewise,eventheoffencesinvolvingonlytwoprivatepersons,but

reflectingdepravityofcharacterorinvolvingcausingintentionallossoflife

orcausingintentionallossofpropertybyextendingimminentthreatofloss

oflife;cannotbepermittedtobecompromised.Excepttheabovementioned

graveoffences,thereiseveryreasonthatallotheroffencesshouldbe

permittedtobecompromisedbytheCourt.Sincetheproofofoffences

beforetheCourt,againwouldinvolvetheconductofthepartiestodispute,

thereforeiftheCourtdoesnotpermitthesametobecompromisedthenthe

3of6
09-06-201907:07:19:::
CRM-M-12936of2019(OM)-4-

partieswouldtendtoplaytricksupontheCourttoensuretheacquittalof

accusedbysubvertingtheadministrationofcriminaljustice.Anditisnever

intheinterestofadministrationofcriminaljusticetoforcethecitizento

learnandadoptthetricksdesignedtobeplayeduponCourtstosubvertthe

justicesystem.Soitwouldalwaysbeintheinterestofjusticeitself;thatthe

compromisebetweenthepartiesisrecognizedandthecitizenremain

mooredandcommittedtotheessentialsofthesystemofadministrationof

justice,atleast,quathoseoffences,whichtheinterestofsocietydoesnot

permittobecompromised.

Hon’bletheSupremeCourthasamplyclarifiedthelegal

positiononrecognizingcompromisinginthecaseofGianSinghVs.State

ofPunjabandanother,2012(4)RCR(Criminal)543,andhasobservedas

under:-

“57.Thepositionthatemergesfromtheabovediscussioncan

besummarisedthus:thepoweroftheHighCourtinquashing

acriminalproceedingorFIRorcomplaintinexerciseofits

inherentjurisdictionisdistinctanddifferentfromthepower

giventoacriminalcourtforcompoundingtheoffencesunder

Section320oftheCode.Inherentpowerisofwideplenitude

withnostatutorylimitationbutithastobeexercisedinaccord

withtheguidelineengraftedinsuchpowerviz;(i)tosecurethe

endsofjusticeor(ii)topreventabuseoftheprocessofany

Court.Inwhatcasespowertoquashthecriminalproceeding

orcomplaintorF.I.Rmaybeexercisedwheretheoffenderand

victimhavesettledtheirdisputewoulddependonthefactsand

circumstancesofeachcaseandnocategorycanbeprescribed.

4of6
09-06-201907:07:19:::
CRM-M-12936of2019(OM)-5-

However,beforeexerciseofsuchpower,theHighCourtmust

havedueregardtothenatureandgravityofthecrime.

Heinousandseriousoffencesofmentaldepravityoroffences

likemurder,rape,dacoity,etc.cannotbefittinglyquashed

eventhoughthevictimorvictim’sfamilyandtheoffenderhave

settledthedispute.Suchoffencesarenotprivateinnatureand

haveseriousimpactonsociety.Similarly,anycompromise

betweenthevictimandoffenderinrelationtotheoffences

underspecialstatuteslikeSectionPreventionofCorruptionActorthe

offencescommittedbypublicservantswhileworkinginthat

capacityetc;cannotprovideforanybasisforquashing

criminalproceedingsinvolvingsuchoffences.Butthecriminal

caseshavingoverwhelminglyandpredominatinglycivil

flavourstandondifferentfootingforthepurposesofquashing,

particularlytheoffencesarisingfromcommercial,financial,

mercantile,civil,partnershiporsuchliketransactionsorthe

offencesarisingoutofmatrimonyrelatingtodowry,etc.orthe

familydisputeswherethewrongisbasicallyprivateor

personalinnatureandthepartieshaveresolvedtheirentire

dispute.Inthiscategoryofcases,HighCourtmayquash

criminalproceedingsifinitsview,becauseofthecompromise

betweentheoffenderandvictim,thepossibilityofconvictionis

remoteandbleakandcontinuationofcriminalcasewouldput

accusedtogreatoppressionandprejudiceandextreme

injusticewouldbecausedtohimbynotquashingthecriminal

casedespitefullandcompletesettlementandcompromisewith

5of6
09-06-201907:07:19:::
CRM-M-12936of2019(OM)-6-

thevictim.Inotherwords,theHighCourtmustconsider

whetheritwouldbeunfairorcontrarytotheinterestofjustice

tocontinuewiththecriminalproceedingorcontinuationofthe

criminalproceedingwouldtantamounttoabuseofprocessof

lawdespitesettlementandcompromisebetweenthevictimand

wrongdoerandwhethertosecuretheendsofjustice,itis

appropriatethatcriminalcaseisputtoanendandifthe

answertotheabovequestion(s)isinaffirmative,theHigh

Courtshallbewellwithinitsjurisdictiontoquashthecriminal

proceeding.”

Thepresentcasedoesnotfallinanyoneoftheexceptions

envisagedabove.Hence,inviewofthereportofJudicialMagistrateIst

Class,Ludhianadated10.04.2019madeinpursuanceoftheorderdated

20.03.2019passedbythisCourt,theCourtfeelsthatnousefulpurpose

wouldbeservedbykeepingtheproceedingsalive.Itwillbeintheinterest

ofjustice,ifthesettlementreachedbetweenthepartiesisaccepted.

Accordingly,thepresentpetitionisallowed.FIRNo.71dated

14.06.2018registeredunderSections406IPC(Sections420and201SectionIPC

addedlateron)atPoliceStationKoomkalan,TehsilandDistrictLudhiana

andallconsequentialproceedingsarisingtherefrom,areherebyquashedqua

thepresentpetitioner,onthebasisofcompromisearrivedatbetweenthe

parties.

May14,2019(RAJBIRSEHRAWAT)
renuJUDGE
WhetherSpeaking/reasonedYes/No
WhetherReportableYes/No

6of6
09-06-201907:07:19:::

Leave a Reply

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

Copyright © 2020 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation
×

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation