file 498a, collect 6 lakhs moolah, quash &HC will oblige !! 6 lakhs in white, how much more in black ??

file 498a, collect 6 lakhs moolah, quash &HC will oblige !! 6 lakhs in white, how much more in black ??

*********************************************************************

Crl. Misc. No. M-15266 of 2010 (O&M) -1 -

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH.

Crl. Misc. No. M-15266 of 2010 (O&M)

Date of Decision: 31.5.2013.

*********************************************************************

Baldev Singh and another ........Petitioners

Vs.

State of Punjab and another ......Respondents

*********************************************************************

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA

*********************************************************************

Present: Mr. Shekhar Kumar, Advocate for Mr. R.S.Bains, Advocate for the petitioners.

Mr. J.S.Bhullar, AAG, Punjab.

Mr. J.P.Rana, Advocate for Mr. Shailender Kumar, Advocate for respondent No. 2. 

*********************************************************************

SABINA, J.

Petitioners have filed this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for quashing of the FIR No. 34 dated 7.4.2010, under Section 420, 498-A, 120-B of the Indian Penal Code ('IPC' for short), registered at Police Station Sadar Kotakpura and all the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom.

Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that now parties have amicably settled their matrimonial dispute. Petitioners have paid ` 6,00,000 to respondent No. 2 by way of settlement of her claims.

Learned counsel for respondent No. 2 has admitted the factum of compromise effected between the parties. He has placed on record original affidavit sworn by respondent No. 2 (Annexure P-3) on record and a photocopy of the draft handed over by the petitioners to respondent No. 2 in the sum of 6,00,000. Learned counsel for respondent No. 2 has further submitted that in view of compromise effected between the parties, respondent No. 2 has no objection if the FIR in question is ordered to be quashed.

As per the Full Bench judgment of this Court in Kulwinder Singh and others vs. State of Punjab, 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052, High Court has power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to allow the compounding of non-compoundable offence and quash the prosecution where the High Court felt that the same was required to prevent the abuse of the process of any Court or to otherwise secure the ends of justice. This power of quashing is not confined to matrimonial disputes alone. Hon'ble the Apex Court in the case of Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab and another 2012 (4) RCR (Crl.) 543, has held as under:-

"57. The position that emerges from the above

discussion can be summarised thus: the power of the

High Court in quashing a criminal proceeding or FIR

or complaint in exercise of its inherent jurisdiction is

distinct and different from the power given to a

criminal court for compounding the offences under

Section 320 of the Code. Inherent power is of wide

plenitude with no statutory limitation but it has to be

exercised in accord with the guideline engrafted in

such power viz; (i) to secure the ends of justice or (ii)

to prevent abuse of the process of any Court. In what

cases power to quash the criminal proceeding or

complaint or F.I.R may be exercised where the

offender and victim have settled their dispute would

depend on the facts and circumstances of each case

and no category can be prescribed. However, before

exercise of such power, the High Court must have due

regard to the nature and gravity of the crime. Heinous

and serious offences of mental depravity or offences

like murder, rape, dacoity, etc. cannot be fittingly

quashed even though the victim or victim's family and

the offender have settled the dispute. Such offences

are not private in nature and have serious impact on

society. Similarly, any compromise between the victim

and offender in relation to the offences under special

statutes like Prevention of Corruption Act or the

offences committed by public servants while working

in that capacity etc; cannot provide for any basis for

quashing criminal proceedings involving such

offences. But the criminal cases having

overwhelmingly and pre-dominatingly civil flavour

stand on different footing for the purposes of

quashing, particularly the offences arising from

commercial, financial, mercantile, civil, partnership or

such like transactions or the offences arising out of

matrimony relating to dowry, etc. or the family

disputes where the wrong is basically private or

personal in nature and the parties have resolved their

entire dispute. In this category of cases, High Court

may quash criminal proceedings if in its view,

because of the compromise between the offender and

victim, the possibility of conviction is remote and

bleak and continuation of criminal case would put

accused to great oppression and prejudice and

extreme injustice would be caused to him by not

quashing the criminal case despite full and complete

settlement and compromise with the victim. In other

words, the High Court must consider whether it would

be unfair or contrary to the interest of justice to

continue with the criminal proceeding or continuation

of the criminal proceeding would tantamount to abuse

of process of law despite settlement and compromise

between the victim and wrongdoer and whether to

secure the ends of justice, it is appropriate that

criminal case is put to an end and if the answer to the

above question(s) is in affirmative, the High Court

shall be well within its jurisdiction to quash the

criminal proceeding."

Since the parties have arrived at a compromise and have decided to live in peace, no useful purpose would be served in allowing the criminal proceedings to continue. Accordingly, this petition is allowed. FIR No. 34 dated 7.4.2010, under Section 420, 498-A, 120-B IPC, registered at Police Station Sadar Kotakpura and all the consequential proceedings, arising therefrom, are quashed.

(SABINA)

 JUDGE

May 31, 2013

Gurpreet

***

FOLLOW 

@ATMwithDick on twitter or 

http://vinayak.wordpress.com/ on wordpress or 

http://evinayak.tumblr.com/ (recent blog so recent cases ) 

FOR 100s of high court and supreme court cases

regards

Vinayak

Father of a lovely daughter, criminal in the eyes of a wife, son of an compassionate elderly mother, old timer who hasn't given up, Male, activist