The Full Bench of this Court, in the case of Kulwinder Singh and others v. State of Punjab andanother 2007(3) RCR (Criminal) 1052 has held that the compromise, in a modern society, is the sine qua non of harmony and orderly behaviour. It is the soul of justice and if the power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. is used to enhance such a compromise which, in turn, enhances the social amity and reduces friction, then it truly is "finest hour of justice". Disputes which have their genesis not only in matrimonial discord but others as well, such compromise deserves to be accepted. It is CRM M-6748 of 2012 -3- further held as under:-
" The only inevitable conclusion from the above discussion is that there is no statutory bar under the Cr.P.C. which can affect the inherent power of this Court under Section 482. Further, the same cannot be limited to matrimonial cases alone and the Court has the wide power to quash the proceedings even in non-compoundable offences notwithstanding the bar under Section 320 of the Cr.P.C in order to prevent the abuse of law and to secure the ends of justice." In the case of Madan Mohan Abbot v. State of Punjab 2008(4) S.C. Cases 582, the Apex Court emphasised and advised as under:-
" We need to emphasise that it is
perhaps advisable that in disputes where the question involved is of a purely personal nature, the court should ordinarily accept the terms of the compromise even in criminal proceedings as keeping the matter alive with no possibility of a result in favour of the prosecution is a luxury which the courts, grossly overburdened as they are, cannot afford and that the time so saved can be utilised in deciding more effective and meaningful litigation. This is a common sense approach to the matter based on ground of realities and bereft of the technicalities of the law."
The present petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of FIR No.2 dated 14.1.2012 under Sections 294/506/509 IPC read with Section 66-E of Information and Technology Act and subsequently added Sections 67-A and 67-B of Information and Technology Act at Police Station Islamabad, District Amritsar and subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise entered into between the parties. The FIR in question was got registered by respondent No.2. However, the matter has been compromised due to the intervention of the respectables of the area. Compromise deed (Annexure P-2) has already been placed on record to this effect. The parties are present in the Court through their respective counsel. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 has placed CRM M-6748 of 2012 -2- on record the affidavit of respondent No.2 admitting the factum of compromise. As per the said affidavit, respondent No.2 has no objection if the FIR in question is quashed. Vide order dated 6.3.2012, notice of motion was issued and the affected parties were directed to appear before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Amritsar on 27.3.2012 and the Chief Judicial Magistrate was directed to record the statements of the parties with regard to compromise and submit its report in this regard.
In pursuance to the same, the report of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Amritsar, has been received. As per the said, the statements of the parties have been recorded. It is further submitted that the Court is satisfied that the parties have made an amicable settlement and have recorded their statements in the Court without any fear or pressure.
Thus, there is no doubt that the matter has been comromised.
The Full Bench of this Court, in the case of Kulwinder Singh and others v. State of Punjab andanother 2007(3) RCR (Criminal) 1052 has held that the compromise, in a modern society, is the sine qua non of harmony and orderly behaviour. It is the soul of justice and if the power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. is used to enhance such a compromise which, in turn, enhances the social amity and reduces friction, then it truly is "finest hour of justice". Disputes which have their genesis not only in matrimonial discord but others as well, such compromise deserves to be accepted. It is CRM M-6748 of 2012 -3- further held as under:-
" The only inevitable conclusion from the above discussion is that there is no statutory bar under the Cr.P.C. which can affect the inherent power of this Court under Section 482. Further, the same cannot be limited to matrimonial cases alone and the Court has the wide power to quash the proceedings even in non-compoundable offences notwithstanding the bar under Section 320 of the Cr.P.C in order to prevent the abuse of law and to secure the ends of justice." In the case of Madan Mohan Abbot v. State of Punjab 2008(4) S.C. Cases 582, the Apex Court emphasised and advised as under:-
" We need to emphasise that it is
perhaps advisable that in disputes where the question involved is of a purely personal nature, the court should ordinarily accept the terms of the compromise even in criminal proceedings as keeping the matter alive with no possibility of a result in favour of the prosecution is a luxury which the courts, grossly overburdened as they are, cannot afford and that the time so saved can be utilised in deciding more effective and meaningful litigation. This is a common sense approach to the matter based on ground of realities and bereft of the technicalities of the law."
Taking into account that the compromise has been effected between the parties, the affidavit of respondent No.2 stating that he has no objection if the FIR is quashed as well as the report received from the Chief Judicial Magistrate, it is a fit case where CRM M-6748 of 2012 -4- there is no impediment in the way of the Court toexercise its inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of FIR in the interest of justice.
Accordingly, the present petition is allowed and FIR No.2 dated 14.1.2012 under Sections 294/506/509 IPC read with Section 66-E of Information and Technology Act and subsequently added Sections 67-A and 67-B ofInformation and Technology Act at Police Station Islamabad, District Amritsar and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom are hereby quashed.
10.5.2012 ( NIRMALJIT KAUR ) rajeev JUDGEa
Punjab-Haryana High Court
Chandan Sharma vs State Of Punjab And Another on 10 May, 2012
The present petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of FIR No.2 dated 14.1.2012 under Sections 294/506/509 IPC read with Section 66-E of Information and Technology Act and subsequently added Sections 67-A and 67-B of Information and Technology Act at Police Station Islamabad, District Amritsar and subsequent proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise entered into between the parties. The FIR in question was got registered by respondent No.2. However, the matter has been compromised due to the intervention of the respectables of the area. Compromise deed (Annexure P-2) has already been placed on record to this effect. The parties are present in the Court through their respective counsel. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 has placed CRM M-6748 of 2012 -2- on record the affidavit of respondent No.2 admitting the factum of compromise. As per the said affidavit, respondent No.2 has no objection if the FIR in question is quashed. Vide order dated 6.3.2012, notice of motion was issued and the affected parties were directed to appear before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Amritsar on 27.3.2012 and the Chief Judicial Magistrate was directed to record the statements of the parties with regard to compromise and submit its report in this regard.
In pursuance to the same, the report of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Amritsar, has been received. As per the said, the statements of the parties have been recorded. It is further submitted that the Court is satisfied that the parties have made an amicable settlement and have recorded their statements in the Court without any fear or pressure.
Thus, there is no doubt that the matter has been comromised.
The Full Bench of this Court, in the case of Kulwinder Singh and others v. State of Punjab andanother 2007(3) RCR (Criminal) 1052 has held that the compromise, in a modern society, is the sine qua non of harmony and orderly behaviour. It is the soul of justice and if the power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. is used to enhance such a compromise which, in turn, enhances the social amity and reduces friction, then it truly is "finest hour of justice". Disputes which have their genesis not only in matrimonial discord but others as well, such compromise deserves to be accepted. It is CRM M-6748 of 2012 -3- further held as under:-
" The only inevitable conclusion from the above discussion is that there is no statutory bar under the Cr.P.C. which can affect the inherent power of this Court under Section 482. Further, the same cannot be limited to matrimonial cases alone and the Court has the wide power to quash the proceedings even in non-compoundable offences notwithstanding the bar under Section 320 of the Cr.P.C in order to prevent the abuse of law and to secure the ends of justice." In the case of Madan Mohan Abbot v. State of Punjab 2008(4) S.C. Cases 582, the Apex Court emphasised and advised as under:-
" We need to emphasise that it is
perhaps advisable that in disputes where the question involved is of a purely personal nature, the court should ordinarily accept the terms of the compromise even in criminal proceedings as keeping the matter alive with no possibility of a result in favour of the prosecution is a luxury which the courts, grossly overburdened as they are, cannot afford and that the time so saved can be utilised in deciding more effective and meaningful litigation. This is a common sense approach to the matter based on ground of realities and bereft of the technicalities of the law."
Taking into account that the compromise has been effected between the parties, the affidavit of respondent No.2 stating that he has no objection if the FIR is quashed as well as the report received from the Chief Judicial Magistrate, it is a fit case where CRM M-6748 of 2012 -4- there is no impediment in the way of the Court toexercise its inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of FIR in the interest of justice.
Accordingly, the present petition is allowed and FIR No.2 dated 14.1.2012 under Sections 294/506/509 IPC read with Section 66-E of Information and Technology Act and subsequently added Sections 67-A and 67-B ofInformation and Technology Act at Police Station Islamabad, District Amritsar and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom are hereby quashed.
10.5.2012 ( NIRMALJIT KAUR ) rajeev JUDGEa
