Punjab-Haryana High Court
Ramesh Kumar vs . State Of Punjab And Another. on 12 December, 2012
Author: M.M.S.Bedi
Bench: M.M.S.Bedi
HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.
***
Criminal Misc. No. M-27508 of 2012
Date of decision: December 12, 2012.
***
Ramesh Kumar Vs. State of Punjab and another.
***
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M.S.BEDI
***
Present: Shri Rahul Rampal, Advocate, for the petitioner.
Shri A.S.Jatana, Addl: A.G.Punjab.
***
M.M.S.BEDI,J (ORAL)
The petitioner, along with his wife Suman Gaba and Sushil Kumar had allegedly received money from the complainant in the name of Lucky Scheme and had refused to repay the amount due. The complainant having received the amount due to her, has compromised the matter with the petitioner.
Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has filed this petition under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C for quashing of FIR bearing No. 87 dated 1.10.2004, under Sections 406, 420, 452, 323, 506, 120-B read with Section 34 IPC registered at Police Station Kotwali District Ludhiana, on the basis of the compromise with the complainant Neeraj Kumari, whose statement has been partly recorded by the trial court.
When questioned as to how the FIR and the criminal proceedings can be partly quashed on the basis of the compromise, learned counsel for the petitioner stated that the co-accused have eloped and that in view of the said circumstances, criminal proceedings can be partly quashed on the basis of the compromise arrived at between the petitioner and the complainant.
-2- Criminal Misc. No. M-27508 of 2012 I have considered the facts and circumstances of the case and I am of the opinion that since the co-accused of the petitioner have eloped, the petitioner can seek acquittal on the basis of statement of the complainant made in the court but partial quashing of the FIR is not warranted.
Accordingly, the petition is dismissed.
However, the right of the petitioner for acquittal on the basis of statement of the complainant Neeraj Kumari, will not be prejudiced in any manner. The trial court of course has recorded the statements of the parties . The said compromise may be taken into consideration while appreciating the statement of the complainant made in the Court. It will be open to the trial court to acquit the petitioner, giving him the benefit of doubt. However, the trial court can proceed against the co-accused, in accordance with law, by recording the statement as per provisions of Section 299 Cr.P.C. The trial court is directed to conclude the trial of the petitioner, within a period of three months, after the recording of the statement of the complainant.
Dismissed.
December 12, 2012 (M.M.S.BEDI) malik JUDGE