Punjab-Haryana High Court
Navdeep Kumar And Anr vs State Of Haryana And Anr on 12 November, 2014
Author: Jitendra Chauhan
Bench: Jitendra Chauhan
CRM No.M-42254 of 2013 & other case -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
(1) CRM No.M-42254 of 2013 (O&M)
Navdeep Kumar and another
...Petitioners
Versus
State of Haryana and another
...Respondents
(2) CRM No.M-9402 of 2014 (O&M)
Chavinder Singh
...Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana and another
...Respondents
Date of decision: 12.11.2014
CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE JITENDRA CHAUHAN
Present: None for the petitioners
(in CRM-M No. 42254 of 2013).
Mr. Paramdeep Singh, Advocate
for the petitioner (in CRM-M-9402 of 2014).
Mr. R.N. Bhardwaj, AAG, Haryana
for the State.
****
Jitendra Chauhan, J. (Oral)
The aforementioned two petitions are being decided by way of common order, as the same have been arising out of the same KUMAR SUMIT 2014.11.14 17:22 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document CRM No.M-42254 of 2013 & other case -2- FIR.
The present petitions under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure have been filed for quashing of FIR No.186 dated 08.06.2012, registered under Sections 406, 407 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code (for short 'the IPC'), at Police Station Sadar Rohtak, and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise (Annexure P-2) arrived at between the parties.
Vide order dated 15.01.2014 (in 1st case), the parties were directed to appear before the learned trial Court, for getting their statements recorded.
Similar, order was also passed in the 2nd case as well on 14.03.2014.
The learned State counsel informs that there are total 11 accused in the present FIR, out of which eight are facing the trial, whereas, the present petitions have been filed by three of them. The remaining three accused have been declared as proclaimed offenders.
Heard.
The petitioners seek quashing of FIR on the basis of compromise. The FIR has been registered at the instance of respondent No.2. The compromise seems to have been effected between three out of eleven accused with the complainant. The circumstances of the present case warrant quashing of the criminal case against the petitioners on the basis of compromise but partial KUMAR SUMIT 2014.11.14 17:22 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document CRM No.M-42254 of 2013 & other case -3- quashing of criminal case on the basis of compromise does not seem to be an act of judicial propriety nor any such partial quashing is permissible as per the judgment in case Kulwinder Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab, 2007(3) RCR (Crl.), 1052.
Accordingly, the present petitions are dismissed. However, It will also be open to the petitioners to file a fresh petition for quashing on the basis of compromise alongwith other co-accused.
12.11.2014 (JITENDRA CHAUHAN)
sumit.k JUDGE
KUMAR SUMIT
2014.11.14 17:22
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this document