Manjinder Kaur 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. 20 dated 19.2.2014 (Annexure-P.1) registered for the offences under Sections 279, 337, 338 and 427 IPC at Police Station Bullowal, District Hoshiarpur and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom in view of the compromise dated 20.2.2014 (Annexure-P.2).

The FIR has been registered on the statement of complainant-Baldev Singh on the allegations that when the complainant was coming towards his village, then the car driven by the petitioner hit his scooty and due to the said accident, he suffered multiple injuries. Now with the intervention of respectables, the matter has amicably been compromised and respondent No. 2 agreed not to pursue with the present case.

Reply by way of affidavit of Shri Harvinder Singh, PPS, Deputy Superintendent of Police, Rural, District Hoshiarpur has been filed on behalf of the respondent-State, wherein it has been stated that the parties neither supplied the copy of compromise to the Police nor they informed the Police regarding the compromise.

Keeping in view the fact that the parties have entered into a compromise, they were directed to appear before learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hoshiarpur for getting their statements recorded in support of the compromise. After doing the needful, learned Chief Judicial Magistrate has sent her report dated 7.5.2014 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 Baldev Singh has stated that the matter has been compromised between them with the intervention of the respectables, which is without any coercion or pressure. This compromise will lead peace and harmony among them. Therefore, he has no objection if the FIR against the petitioner is quashed.

Learned Assistant Advocate General, Punjab, on instructions from the Investigating Officer has contested this petition on the ground that the compromise entered into between the parties was not brought to the notice of the Police.

Learned counsel for complainant-respondent No. 2 admits the factum of compromise and submits that they have indeed settled their dispute and the complainant has 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 petitioner 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. 20 dated 19.2.2014 (Annexure-P.1) registered for the offences under Sections 279, 337, 338 and 427 IPC at Police Station Bullowal, District Hoshiarpur and all subsequent proceedings arising out of the same are hereby quashed.