Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 6, Cited by 2]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Tejinder Singh @ Teja vs State Of Punjab And Ors on 9 May, 2017

Author: Jitendra Chauhan

Bench: Jitendra Chauhan

CRM-M-13984-2017                                                                -1-

      IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
                     CHANDIGARH

                                                 CRM-M-13984-2017 (O&M)
                                                 Date of decision : 09.05.2017

Tejinder Singh @ Teja
                                                                   ...Petitioner(s)

                                    Versus

State of Punjab and others
                                                                 ...Respondent(s)

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA CHAUHAN

Present:    Mr. R.K. Samyal, Advocate
            for the petitioner(s).

            Mr. R.S. Nain, AAG, Punjab

            Respondent No.3-Ajay Kumar, present in person with
            Mr. Sarju Puri, Advocate

JITENDRA CHAUHAN, J. (Oral)

This petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing of FIR No.18 dated 18.05.2012, registered under Sections 307, 326, 323, 506 and 148 read with Section 149 IPC, at Police Station Pojewal, Distt. SBS Nagar, and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise arrived at between the parties.

The learned counsel for respondent No.3, on instructions, states that after the compromise reached between the parties, the petitioner has again resorted to issuing threats to respondent No.3 and there is serious apprehension to his life and liberty at the hands of the petitioner. The injuries suffered by respondent No.3 are the loss of one little finger of his 1 of 2 ::: Downloaded on - 03-06-2017 11:55:11 ::: CRM-M-13984-2017 -2- right hand and total loss of vision of left eye.

Heard.

In view of the injuries suffered by respondent No.3 and the threat perceptions received by him from the petitioner, disentitles the petitioner from the relief sought on the basis of compromise, which in the opinion of this Court itself is a result of force, coercion and intimidation.

Accordingly, the instant petition is dismissed.





09.05.2017                                          (JITENDRA CHAUHAN)
ashok                                                      JUDGE
        Whether speaking/reasoned:          Yes /   No

        Whether reportable:                 Yes /   No




                                           2 of 2
                        ::: Downloaded on - 03-06-2017 11:55:12 :::