9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (4) TMI 983X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nue estate of Village Jhanjanwala, Tehsil Narwana, District Jind. She acquired ownership of the land as per the consent decree dated 02.02.1998 passed by Civil Court, Narwana in a Civil Suit titled as Reshma v. Rajmal (i.e. husband of Reshma). Rajmal had married twice and both the petitioners were born out of his first marriage whereas respondent No. 2 was his second wife. 2. Respondent No. 2 filed a criminal complaint under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C. before the Judicial Magistrate with the following allegations:- a) That the petitioners wanted to grab her land comprising 1/5th share in the total land measuring 180K-18M whereas she wanted partition of the joint holding and her exclusive possession of the land under her ownership, for which she went to the Tehsil Office at Narwana on 27.05.1997; b) One Ganga Singh met her in the Tehsil office and asked her as to why was she there. She told Ganga Singh regarding her dispute with the petitioners and her desire to get her land partitioned. Ganga Singh offered his services for this purpose and took her to his house where she stayed for the night. Next day i.e. on 28.05.1997, Ganga Singh took her to Hisar and obtained her ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... case is put to an end by way of the quashment of above sentence and acquitting the second party. The first party will be under legal obligation to make statement in favour of the second party. 2. That the first party shall not pursue the said case against the second party in any circumstances whatsoever. 3. xxx xxx xxx 4. That the first party shall be under obligation to make statement in the court in favour of the second party and it will be also the responsibility of the first party that this willingness in the said case shall also depose in favour of the second party, in case of need as the matter has been compromised. 5. xxx xxx xxx 6. That both first party and second party have settled the matter in all respects. 7. That both first party and second party are all living under one roof being mother and sons. 7. On the basis of compromise dated 08.08.2011 that the petitioners seek to invoke inherent powers of this Court under Section 482 CrPC for issuance of a direction to the learned Appellate Court where the criminal appeal preferred by them against the judgement and order dated 16.03.2009 is pending, to 'compound' the offences and acq ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... il Suri v. Central Bureau of Investigation and another, 2011(3) R.C.R.(Criminal) 356 : 2011(3) Recent Apex Judgments (R.A.J.) 450 : (2011)5 Supreme Court Cases 708, in paragraph No. 34 has observed that jurisdiction of Apex Court under Article 142 of the Constitution of India or jurisdiction of the High Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. should not be invoked to direct quashing of a case involving crime against the society. Learned counsel for the petitioners has vehemently argued that Five Judges' Bench of this Court in the case of Kulwinder Singh and others v. State of Punjab and another, 2007(3) RCR(Criminal) 1052 has laid down that in an appropriate case this Court can exercise jurisdiction to quash the criminal proceedings on the basis of compromise. In the opinion of this Court, matter requires consideration by the Larger Bench of this Court as to whether criminal proceedings can be quashed by this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. when accused was found guilty and has been convicted by the trial Court and appeal therefrom is pending before Sessions Judge. 9. From the above-reproduced reference order, the following two questions arise for determination by the la ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ower of a criminal court is circumscribed by the. provisions contained in Section 320 and the court is guided solely and squarely thereby while, on the other hand, the formation of opinion by the High Court for quashing a criminal offence or criminal proceeding or criminal complaint is guided by the material on record as to whether the ends of justice would justify such exercise of power although the ultimate consequence may be acquittal or dismissal of indictment. 54. Where High Court quashes a criminal proceeding having regard to the fact that dispute between the offender and victim has been settled although offences are not compoundable, it does so as in its opinion, continuation of criminal proceedings will be an exercise in futility and justice in the case demands that the dispute between the parties is put to an end and peace is restored; securing the ends of justice being the ultimate guiding factor. No doubt, crimes are acts which have harmful effect on the public and consist in wrong doing that seriously endangers and threatens well-being of society and it is not safe to leave the crime doer only because he and the victim have settled the dispute amicably or that the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... i) Bankat v. State of Maharashtra, (2005)1 SCC 343; and (iii) Gulab Das Ors. v. 2005(1) R.C.R. (Criminal) 306 : State of MP, 2012(1) R.C.R. (Criminal) 220 : 2011(6) Recent Apex Judgments (R.A.J.) 381 : (2011)10 SCC 765. 14. The refusal to invoke power under Section 320 CrPC, however, does not debar the High Court from resorting to its inherent power under Section 482 CrPC and pass an appropriate order so as to secure the ends of justice. Question No. 2 15. As regards the doubt expressed by the learned Single Judge whether the inherent power under Section 482 CrPC to quash the criminal proceedings on the basis of compromise entered into between the parties can be invoked even if the accused has been held guilty and convicted by the trial Court, we find that in Dr. Arvind Barsaul etc. v. State of Madhya Pradesh Anr., 2008(2) R.C.R. (Criminal) 910 : (2008)5 SCC 794, the unfortunate matrimonial dispute was settled after the appellant (husband) had been convicted under Section 498A IPC and sentenced to 18 months' imprisonment and his appeal was pending before the first appellate court. The Apex Court quashed the criminal proceedings keeping in view the peculiar fa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... garding her land. In said criminal complaint, Sube Singh etc. were convicted and they had filed an appeal in the Court. She further deposed that on 08.08.2011 with the intervention of members of Panchayat, a compromise had entered between her, Sube Singh and Rameshwar, which was reduced into writing which is marked as X-1. She stated that she has heard the contents of compromise dated 8.8.2011 mark X-1 it is the same compromise, which was got affected by Panchayat between her and her two sons Sube Singh and Rameshwar and in presence of daughter Kamlesh, Ved Parkash her son-in-law, Kuldeep Sarpanch, village Jhanjanwala, Sunita, the member Panchayat Jhanjanwala and all the parties to the compromise had put their respective thumb impressions and signatures after understanding. She also deposed that as per the compromise she has agreed that she had no objection, if the case/appeal preferred by Sube Singh and Rameshwar is put to an end and the same is set aside and they are acquitted. She also testified that she had agreed to give statement or execute affidavit in favour of Sube Singh and Rameshwar in the Court and would also cooperate with Sube Singh and others in putting an end to the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is also proved that the petitioners and respondent No. 2 are living under the same roof. In fact to remove any sort of doubts regarding the genuineness of the compromise, respondent No. 2 appeared before us along with her daughter and made a statement on oath on 03.04.2013 in support of the compromise. She also stated that the parties are living under the one roof and she is being well looked after by her sons, namely, the petitioners. 20. In the light of these peculiar facts and circumstances where not only the parties but their close relatives (including daughter and son-in-law of respondent No. 2) have also supported the amicable settlement, we are of the considered view that the negation of the compromise would disharmonize the relationship and cause a permanent rift amongst the family members who are living together as a joint family. Non-acceptance of the compromise would also lead to denial of complete justice which is the very essence of our justice delivery system. Since there is no statutory embargo against invoking of power under Section 482 CrPC after conviction of an accused by the trial Court and during pendency of appeal against such conviction, it appears to be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... udge, Jind who shall then ascertain the genuineness of the proposed transaction through the aegis of the District Legal Services Authority and no deed shall be executed unless it is certified that respondent No. 2 has decided to enter into the proposed transaction at her freewill and the transaction is ex facie in her own interest; v. The petitioners shall be obligated to look after and take care of respondent No. 2 in the same manner as they have promised in terms of the compromise and any complaint of maltreatment, neglect or misbehaviour, if made by respondent No. 2 to the police authorities, shall be taken cognizance of within 24 hours and appropriate action shall be taken with prior intimation to the District Sessions Judge, Jind. vi. Respondent No. 2 shall always be at liberty to approach this Court and seek recall of this order, if there is any breach of the compromise by the petitioner(s) or of the directions given hereinabove. 23. A copy of this order be sent to the learned District Sessions Judge, Jind as well as Mr. R.D. Sharma, DAG Haryana for onward transmission to (i) the Deputy Commissioner-cum-Collector, Jind; (ii) the Sub-Divisional Officer (Civi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
