MAHENDRA SINGH & ORS Vs. STATE & ANR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This misc. petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is laid by police personnels with a prayer to quash FIR No.216 of 2016 registered at Police Station, Nohar, District Hanumangarh. The said relief is claimed by the petitioners on the strength of a compromise arrived at between them and the respondent complainant and victims.

(2.) Succinctly stated, facts of the case are that second-respondent complainant submitted a criminal complaint before the Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nohar (for short, 'trial Court') charging the petitioners for offence under Section 341, 323, 504, 506, 477A, 166, 167 and 143 IPC. In the complaint, besides the petitioners, some other persons were also arrayed as accused. Upon receipt of the complaint, the learned trial Court, while resorting to sub-sec.(3) of Section 156 Cr.P.C. sent the same to the concerned SHO for investigation. The concerned police authorities, after receiving the complaint, registered FIR No.206 of 2016 on 28 th of March 2016 and proceeded with investigation. When the investigation was in progress, the respondent complainant and victims changed their vision and inspired by the concept of Lok Adalat amicably settled the disputes with petitioners by entering into a compromise and after reducing the compromise in writing the same was presented at Police Station Nohar on 11 th of May 2016. The compromise was executed on a hundred rupees non-judicial stamp and the same was witnessed by three independent witnesses. Later on, before submission of the written compromise, the complainant and victims also submitted two applications before the Superintendent of Police, District Hanumangarh with a request not to take any action against the petitioners as he sorted out his dispute with them and stated that the proceedings in the matter be closed perpetually. All endeavours made by complainant and victims as well as by the petitioners proved abortive and that prompted the petitioners to invoke inherent powers of this Court by this petition for seeking redressal of their grievances.

(3.) In the petition, the petitioners have pleaded many grounds for substantiating their plea for annulment of the impugned FIR and entire criminal proceedings. While referring to Section 320 Cr.P.C., it is also pleaded that the same cannot be an embargo for quashing the FIR as inherent powers of this Court are not subservient to rigor of Section 320 Cr.P.C.