Punjab-Haryana High Court
Tara Chand & Others vs State Of Haryana And Others on 30 November, 2009
Author: Nirmaljit Kaur
Bench: Nirmaljit Kaur
Crl. Misc. No.M-31206 of 2009 (O&M) 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH.
Crl. Misc. No.M-31206 of 2009 (O&M)
Date of Decision: 30.11.2009
Tara Chand & others
....Petitioners
Versus
State of Haryana and others
...Respondents
CORAM : Hon'ble Ms. Justice Nirmaljit Kaur
Present:- Mr. Jagat Singh, Advocate
for the petitioners.
Mr. P.M. Anand, Additional Advocate General, Haryana
for the State.
Mr. Shyam Partap, Advocate
for respondents No.2 and 3.
*****
1. Whether Reporters of Local Newspapers may be
allowed to see the judgment ?
2. To be referred to the Reporters or not ?
3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the
Digest ?
**
NIRMALJIT KAUR, J. (ORAL)
The petitioner has approached this Court for the quashing of FIR No.19 dated 27.01.2000 under Sections 148, 149, 323, 324, 326 registered at Police Station Sadar, Dadri. Reply on behalf of respondent No.1 has been filed in the Court today. The same is taken on record. It is stated that the matter has been compromised. The compromise is also placed on record.
It would be relevant to note the contents of the FIR in this case. As per the FIR, the husband of Sunita Devi was going to Village Modi Crl. Misc. No.M-31206 of 2009 (O&M) 2 on a cycle with milk drums and when he reached one Killa ahead of Village Ram Nagar, which is near Kapoori Drain, then a Commandar Jeep came from behind and stopped near her husband. Tara Chand son of Gulzar, Vijay son of Ranjeet and two sons of Phool Singh and two sons of Gulzar, jat resident of Ghardana Kalan (Raj.) and his daughter-in-law resident of Dadoth (Raj.) alighted from the jeep and threatened. They were all armed with different weapons and caused injuries to her husband. The motive attributed is that there was a land dispute. The complainant herself has stepped forward to record her statement. She has no objection, if the FIR is quashed. She has made the statement out of her own free will.
Seeing the nature of the dispute and also taking into account that the parties are from the same Village and same brotherhood and are distantly related to each other, it would be in the interest of justice as well as for reducing the friction and bring out the social amity, to quash the FIR. As per the Full Bench Judgment of this Court, rendered in Kulwinder Singh and others vs. State of Punjab and another reported in RCR (Criminal) 2007(3) 1053, I find, it would be a fit case to quash the FIR on the basis of the compromise having been amicably entered into. As per the said judgment, the dispute which involve commercial transactions, land disputes and other such matters can safely be dealt with by the Court by exercising its powers under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. in the event of a compromise. Reliance has also been placed on the judgment of this Court rendered in the case of Bhagwan Kaur and others vs. State of Punjab and others reported as 2008(1) R.C.R. (Criminal) 361. In the exercise of the inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C., I find no reason as to why the FIR in the facts and circumstances of the case, cannot be quashed.
Accordingly, the petition is allowed. The compromise dated 23.07.2009 is accepted and the criminal proceedings against the petitioner arising out of the FIR No.19 dated 27.01.2000 under Sections 148, 149, Crl. Misc. No.M-31206 of 2009 (O&M) 3 323, 324, 326 registered at Police Station Sadar, Dadri, as well as, the proceedings pending against all the accused in pursuance to the said FIR, hereby, quashed.
(NIRMALJIT KAUR) 30.11.2009 JUDGE gurpreet