Limitation | Delay Condonation Cannot Be An Act Of Generosity: Supreme Court Refuses To Condone 31-Year Delay To Challenge Decree Sentence Suspension In Murder Cases Only Under Exceptional Circumstances; Presumption Of Innocence Erased Upon Conviction: Supreme Court Inquiry Commission Report Cannot Be Used For Disciplinary Action If Statutory Right To Cross-Examine Denied: Gauhati High Court Use Of Trademark On Website Accessible In India Constitutes Domestic Use, Geo-Blocking Mandatory For Territorial Restrictions: Delhi High Court Civil Court Jurisdiction To Interfere With DRT Proceedings Is Absolutely Barred Even For Third Parties: Madras High Court Adding a Prefix Can’t Erase Deceptive Similarity – Delhi High Court Orders Removal of ‘ARUN’ from Trademark ‘AiC ARUN’ Cannot Resile From Mediated Settlement After Taking Benefits: Supreme Court Quashes Wife's DV Case, Grants Divorce Absolute Indemnity Obligation Triggers Immediately Upon Court-Directed Deposit, Not On Final Appeal: Supreme Court Magistrate Directing Investigation Under Section 156(3) CrPC Only Requires Prima Facie Satisfaction Of Cognizable Offence: Supreme Court Cancellation Of Sale Deed Under Specific Relief Act Not A Pre-Condition To Initiate Criminal Case For Forgery: Supreme Court Amalgamated Company Cannot Claim Set-Off Of Predecessor's Losses Under Kerala Agricultural Income Tax Act Without Specific Statutory Provision: Supreme Court Overlapping Split Chargesheets May Raise Double Jeopardy Concerns, Supreme Court Notes While Granting Bail To Former Jharkhand Minister Supreme Court Grants Bail To Convicted Ex-Jharkhand Minister Facing Overlapping Prosecutions From Split Chargesheets Electricity Act Appellate Authority Is A Quasi-Judicial Body Subject To High Court’s Supervisory Jurisdiction: Madhya Pradesh High Court Mere Discrepancy In Date Of Birth Across Certificates Doesn't Amount To Fraud If No Undue Advantage Is Derived: Allahabad High Court Interest Earned On Funds Temporarily Parked Pending Project Deployment Cannot Be Taxed As 'Income From Other Sources': Delhi High Court Reference Court Cannot Set Aside Collector's Award Or Remand Matter For Fresh Determination: Allahabad High Court Administrative Transfer Causing Revenue Loss Defies Court Process: Calcutta High Court Strikes Down Ferry Ghat Handover Government Can Resume Leased Land For Public Purpose; 'Substantial Compliance' Of 60-Day Notice Sufficient: Kerala High Court Revenue Can't Cite Pending Litigation to Justify One Year of Adjudication Inaction: Karnataka High Court

Punjab and Haryana High Court Upholds Quashing of FIR in Interest of Justice Based on Compromise between Accused and Aggrieved Person

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


Punjab and Haryana High court held in a recent judgement (Krishan Kumar @ Ghoni vs State Of Punjab And Another CRM-M No.51112 of 2019 D.D 06/02/2023) concluded that the exercise of its inherent power to quash the FIR and all subsequent proceedings was justified in the interest of justice. The court noted that the compromise between the accused and the aggrieved person was made amicably and voluntarily, and there was no evidence of coercion, threats, or other dubious means being used to secure the settlement.

Facts - petition filed by an accused person seeking to quash FIR No.158 Dated 06.09.2017, Police Station Sadar Hoshiarpur,  Sections 326 , 324, 328, 148, 149 and all subsequent proceedings. The accused approached the court under Section 482 CrPC for the quashing of the FIR and all subsequent proceedings based on a compromise made with the aggrieved person. During the pendency of the petition, the accused and the aggrieved person compromised the matter, and the petitioner approached the court to quash the FIR. The aggrieved person Hitesh Kumar consented to the quashing of the FIR and the subsequent proceedings.

Despite opposition from the State's counsel, the court concluded that the quashing of the FIR and the subsequent proceedings was justified. The court found that the settlement between the accused and the aggrieved person was not secured through coercion or other dubious means, the aggrieved person consented to the nullification of criminal proceedings, there was no objection to quashing the FIR, and the compromise would not harm public peace or the social and moral fabric of society.

Hon’ble High Court observed that the Supreme Court in the case of Shiji @ Pappu v. Radhika and Parbatbhai Aahir v State of Gujarat laid down the broad principles for quashing of FIR. The High Court may quash the prosecution even in cases where the offences are non-compoundable, as long as it is for the ends of justice and not an abuse of the process of law. The exercise of power under Section 482 must be done with care and caution and the High Court will have to consider the facts and circumstances of each case to determine whether it is a fit case for invoking its inherent. Petition Allowed.

Krishan Kumar @ Ghoni  vs State Of Punjab And Another

Latest Legal News