Judgment:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUN JAB AN D HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl.Misc.No.M-24771 of 2013 DATE OF DECISION: July 1,2014 Natha Singh and others …..Petitioners Versus Rajinder Kumar @ Rinku ……Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE DAYA CHAUDHARY Present: Mr.Piyush Sharma, Advocate for the petitioneRs.Mr.Yogesh Kumar Aneja, Advocate for respondent No.1.
Mr.D.S.Virk, AAG, Punjab.
DAYA CHAUDHARY, J.
The petitioners who are accused in criminal case for offence under sections 379,382,506,148,149 IPC have approached this Court for quashing of complaint and other consequential proceedings on the basis of compromise effected with the complainant.
Notice of motion was issued in the case on 6.8.2013 and thereafter as per direction issued by this Court on 30.9.2013, the parties to the case were directed to appear before the trial Court for recording their statements with regard to compromise.
The trial Court was directed to Sehra Kamal Deep 2014.07.11 17:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court.
Chandigarh Crl.Misc.No.M-24771 of 2013 2 record their statements to its satisfaction to know its genuineness that the statements are not the result of any pressure or coercion in any manner.
In response to that direction, the petitioners as well as the complainant appeared before the trial Court and their statements were recorded.
A report along with the statements of the parties have been sent by the trial Court which is on record.
It has been mentioned in the report that a compromise has been effected between the parties with the intervention of the respectable of the locality and compromise is voluntary, without any threat or coercion.
In their respective statements, it has been mentioned that they have no grouse against each other.
The factum of compromise has been affirmed by the complainant.
Since the dispute between the parties has been resolved, the complainant has no objection in quashing of the complaint and other proceedings arising therefrom.
Learned counsel for the parties have stated that the petitioners and the complainant are known to each other and there was some financial dispute between them which has been sorted out.
The compromise has been reduced into writing in the presence of witnesses.
Both the parties have sorted out their dispute and now they want to lead peaceful and happy life.
Sehra Kamal Deep 2014.07.11 17:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court.
Chandigarh Crl.Misc.No.M-24771 of 2013 3 In view of the submissions, as mentioned above, and also the compromise effected between the parties, there is no justification in continuing with the proceedings as no purpose would be served as the complainant has no grouse against the accused petitioneRs.Moreover, the complainant is not going to support the case of the prosecution because of compromise.
It would be a futile exercise and valuable time of the Court will be wasted.
Moreover, this Court has power under Section 482 CrPC to quash the proceedings even in non compoundable offence to prevent abuse of process of law or to secure the ends of justice as has been held by the Larger Bench of this Court in judgment titled Kulwinder Singh v.
State of Punjab 2007(3) RCR (Criminal) paged 1052.
Accordingly, the present petition is allowed.
Complaint No.368-1 dated 25.9.2009/17.4.2010 under Sections 379,382,506,148,149 IPC and other proceedings arising therefrom are quashed against the present petitioneRs.July 01,2014 (Daya Chaudhary) KD Judge Sehra Kamal Deep 2014.07.11 17:35 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court.
Chandigarh