Crl.
Misc.
not M-27328 of 2012 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl.
Misc.
not M-27328 of 2012 (O&M) Date of decision:
22. 01.2013 Jaspal Singh and others ....Petitioners Versus State of Punjab and others ....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE PARAMJEET SINGH Present: - Mr.Ashish Aggarwal, Advocate, for the petitioneRs.Mr.Gurinderjit Singh, DAG, Punjab.
Mr.Ashok Giri, Advocate, for respondents No.2 and 3.
PARAMJEET SINGH, J.
(ORAL) Present petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C.for quashing of FIR No.75 dated 30.6.2007, registered under Sections 498- A/406 IPC and Sections 5/31 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 at Police Station Verowal, District Tarn Taran, and all the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise dated 5.7.2012 (Annexure P-2).Learned counsel for the petitioners states that the entire payment has been made to respondent No.3 and has handed over photocopy of demand draft dated 11.1.2013 bearing No.184609 for sum of Rs.6,50,000/- drawn in favour of respondent No.3.
Learned counsel for the petitioners has relied upon a judgment of this Court in the matter of Bhupinder Kaur versus State of Punjab and another, 2004(2) RCR (Criminal) 443 to contend that there is no reasonable likelihood of the accused being convicted for the offence for the reason that the complainant has compromised the matter with the Crl.
Misc.
not M-27328 of 2012 -2- accused and he is not likely to support the prosecution and from other facts and circumstances available on the record, therefore, it would not be in the interest of justice to decline the prayer for quashing of the FIR on the ground that it would amount to be permitting the parties to compound non-compoundable offence.
Learned counsel for respondents No.2 and 3, on instructions from the complainant/respondents No.2 and 3, states that complainant would have no objection, if the present FIR along with consequential proceedings, arising out of it, are quashed.
Rather it would be in the interest of both the parties in order to live peacefully and harmoniously because of amicable settlement between the parties.
Learned counsel for respondents No.2 and 3/complainant has also handed over affidavits dated 15.1.2013 and 16.1.2013 to the above effect, which is taken on record.
Consequently, in view of compromise (Annexure P-2) and keeping in view the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Madan Mohan Abbot versus State of Punjab, 2008(2) RCR (Criminal) 429, which has been affirmed by a Larger Bench of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Gian Singh versus State of Punjab and another, 2012(4) RCR (Criminal) 543, by the Full Bench judgment of this Court in the case of Kulwinder Singh and others versus State of Punjab and another, 2007(3) RCR (Crl.) 1052, and judgment of this Court in Bhupinder Kaur's case (supra) no useful purpose would be served in prolonging the litigation, especially when this case does not fall within the category of exceptional cases where this Court should not exercise its inherent jurisdictional power to quash the criminal proceedings, as held in Gian Singh's case Crl.
Misc.
not M-27328 of 2012 -3- (supra).In the facts and circumstances of this case it would be unfair or contrary to the interest of justice to continue with the criminal proceedings or continuation of the criminal proceedings would amount to abuse of process of law despite settlement and compromise between the victim and wrongdoer and to secure the ends of justice, therefore, it is appropriate that criminal case is put to an end.
Present petition is allowed.
FIR No.75 dated 30.6.2007, registered under Sections 498-A/406 IPC and Sections 5/31 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 at Police Station Verowal, District Tarn Taran, is hereby quashed and all the criminal proceedings arising out of the said FIR also stand quashed.
(Paramjeet Singh) Judge January 22, 2013 R.S.