Bhola Singh and Others vs State of Punjab and Another

Inderjit Singh, J.—This petition has been filed u/s 482 Cr. P.C. praying for quashing of FIR No. 83 dated 2.7.2013 (Annexure-P.1) registered for the offences under Sections 323, 341, 506 and 34 IPC and Section 3 of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, which was added later on, at Police Station Sarhali, District Tarn Taran and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom in view of the compromise (Annexures-P.3 and P. 4).

The FIR has been registered on the statement of complainant-Sukhraj Singh on the allegations that Bhola Singh along with his accomplices came in two cars and started slapping him and his accomplices started giving him beatings. They also gave him life threats. The reason behind the above incident was an old enmity due to the fact that Bhola Singh was forcing him to cast votes in favour of Rajwant Kaur, who was the candidate for Sarpanch in their Village. Now with the intervention of respectable persons of the Village, the matter has been amicably settled and compromise deeds (Annexures-P.3 and 4) in this regard have been entered into between the parties.

Keeping in view the fact that the parties have entered into a compromise, they were directed to appear before learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Tarn Taran for getting their statements recorded in support of the compromise. After doing the needful, learned Chief Judicial Magistrate has sent her report dated 9.5.2014 submitting that the compromise arrived at between the parties is without any pressure or coercion from any one and the same is genuine one. Complainant Sukhraj Singh has stated that the matter has been compromised between the parties, which is voluntary, without any coercion and undue influence from any quarter and he has no objection if the aforesaid FIR is quashed.

Learned Assistant Advocate General, Punjab, on instructions from the Investigating Officer and learned counsel for complainant-respondent No. 2 admit the factum of compromise and submit that in case the parties have indeed settled their dispute, the State would have no objection to the quashing of the FIR in view of the law laid down by the Hon''ble Supreme Court.

I have gone through the record and have heard learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned Assistant Advocate General, Punjab and learned counsel for complainant-respondent No. 2.

In a decision, based on compromise, none of the parties is a loser. Rather, compromise not only brings peace and harmony between the parties to a dispute, but also restores tranquility in the society. After considering the nature of offences allegedly committed and the fact that both the parties have amicably settled their dispute, continuance of criminal prosecution would be an exercise in futility, as the chances of ultimate conviction are bleak.

The Hon''ble Supreme Court in Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab and Another, , has held that the inherent jurisdiction of this Court u/s 482 Cr. P.C. can be exercised to quash the proceedings in respect of criminal cases 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 personnel in nature and the parties have resolved their entire dispute even though they are not compoundable. Therefore, keeping in view the fact that the dispute has been amicably settled and the law laid down in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and another (supra), this petition is allowed and FIR No. 83 dated 2.7.2013 (Annexure-P.1) registered for the offences under Sections 323, 341, 506 and 34 IPC and Section 3 of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, which was added later on, at Police Station Sarhali, District Tarn Taran and all subsequent proceedings arising out of the same are hereby quashed.