Punjab-Haryana High Court
Neelam Rani And Others vs State Of Punjab And Others on 14 November, 2018
Author: Jaishree Thakur
Bench: Jaishree Thakur
Crl. Misc. M-30485 of 2018 (O&M) -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND
HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Crl. Misc. M-30485 of 2018 (O&M)
Date of Decision: 14-11-2018
Neelam Rani and others
...Petitioner(s)
Versus
State of Punjab and others ...Respondent(s)
CORAM:- HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JAISHREE THAKUR
Present:- Mr. M.S. Dua, Advocate
for the petitioners.
Mr. RS Khaira, AAG, Punjab.
Mr. Vishneet Singh, Advocate
for the respondent Nos.2 & 3.
JAISHREE THAKUR, J. (Oral)
This petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking quashing of FIR No.0174 dated 12.07.2018 registered under Sections 451, 354, 323, 506 of the Indian Penal Code at Police Station Division No.4, District Police Commissionerate, Ludhiana (Annexure P/1) and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom in view of the compromise dated 14.07.2018 (Annexure P/2).
The aforesaid FIR has been registered on the statement of complainant-respondent No.2 on the allegations that the accused-petitioners have beaten the private-respondents, outraged the modesty of respondent No.2 and threatened to kill her. Now with the intervention of respectable persons, the matter has been amicably compromised between the parties and they have resolved their disputes and differences.
1 of 3
::: Downloaded on - 01-01-2019 03:02:37 :::
Crl. Misc. M-30485 of 2018 (O&M) -2-
Keeping in view the fact that the parties have entered into a compromise, they were directed to appear before the trial court/Illaqa Magistrate for getting their statements recorded in support of the compromise. In pursuance of the direction, a report dated 26.10.2018 has been received from Judicial Magistrate Ist Class at Ludhiana forwarded by the District and Sessions Judge, Ludhiana, stating that the compromise arrived at between the parties is without any pressure or coercion from any one and the same is genuine one.
Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent-State, on instructions from the Investigating Officer and learned counsel for the complainant-respondent No.2 admit the factum of compromise and submit that in case the parties have indeed settled their dispute, the State would have no objection to the quashing of the FIR, in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record.
In a decision, based on compromise, none of the parties is a loser. Rather, a compromise not only brings peace and harmony between the parties to a dispute, but also restores tranquility in the society. After considering the nature of offences allegedly committed and the fact that both the parties have amicably settled their dispute, continuance of criminal prosecution would be an exercise in futility, as the chances of ultimate conviction are bleak.
Consequently, keeping in view the fact that the dispute has been amicably settled and in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble 2 of 3 ::: Downloaded on - 01-01-2019 03:02:37 ::: Crl. Misc. M-30485 of 2018 (O&M) -3- Supreme Court in Narinder Singh and others vs. State of Punjab and another, (2014) 6 SCC 466, this petition is allowed and FIR No.0174 dated 12.07.2018 registered under Sections 451, 354, 323, 506 of the Indian Penal Code at Police Station Division No.4, District Police Commissionerate, Ludhiana and all subsequent proceedings arising out of the same are quashed qua both the petitioners herein only.
The petition stands disposed of.
November 14, 2018 (JAISHREE THAKUR)
seema JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned Yes
Whether reportable Yes/No
3 of 3
::: Downloaded on - 01-01-2019 03:02:37 :::