GURPREET SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C on behalf of petitioners namely, Gurpreet Singh, Harinder Singh and Harmeet Kaur for quashing of FIR No.192 dated 29.10.2010 registered under Sections 406 & 498-A IPC at Police Station Sultanwind, Amritsar on the basis of compromise before Lok Adalat vide order dated 28.1.2011 which is annexed as Annexure P-2 with the petition. Notice of motion was issued on 1.2.2011.

(2.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioners submits that the dispute between the parties has been resolved and statements of the parties in this regard have been recorded before Permanent Lok Adalat at the time of filing of the application for anticipatory bail as the matter was referred to Lok Adalat. Statements of the parties are annexed as Annexure P-3 with the petition. LEARNED counsel for the petitioners further submits that compromise has been effected between the parties with certain terms and conditions as mentioned in the statement and the complainant has also affirmed the factum of compromise. She has stated that she has no claim regarding dowry articles, maintenance against the petitioners and she has no objection in quashing of the FIR and subsequent proceedings. LEARNED counsel for the petitioner has also placed on record copy of the statement recorded in a petition filed under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. An amount of Rs.8 lacs has been paid in the Court against total amount of Rs.16 lacs as settled in the compromise.

(3.) IT has been observed by Hon'ble the Apex Court in Mrs. Shakuntala Sawhney v. Mrs. Kaushalya Sawhney (1980)1 SCC 63 that "the finest Hour of Justice arrives propitiously when parties, despite falling apart, bury the hatchet and weave a sense of fellowship of reunion." The power to do complete justice is the very essence of every judicial justice dispensation system. IT cannot be diluted by distorted perceptions and is not a slave to anything, except to the caution and circumspection, the standards of which the Court sets before it, in exercise of such plenary and unfettered power inherently vested in it while donning the cloak of compassion to achieve the ends of justice. Relying on the views adopted by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the Five Judges Bench of this Court also observed in Kulwinder Singh v. State of Punjab 2007(3) R.C.R. (Cri) 1052 that compounding of offence which are not compoundable under Section 320(9) Cr.P.C., offence non-compoundable but parties entering into compromise, High Court has the power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to allow the compounding of non-compoundable offences and quash the prosecution where the High Court felt that the same was required to prevent the abuse of the process of Court or to otherwise secure the ends of justice. While dealing with issue of quashing of FIR on the basis of compromise a Bench consisting of Five Hon'ble Judges of this Court in Kulwinder Singh's case (supra) while approving minority view in Dharambir v. State of Haryana 2005 (3) RCR (Criminal) 426: 2005(2) Apex Criminal 424: 2005 (2) Law Herald 723 (P&H) (FB), opined as under:-