Punjab-Haryana High Court
Mandeep Singh @ Khanna vs State Of Punjab And Another on 24 May, 2013
Author: L. N. Mittal
Bench: L. N. Mittal
Crl. Misc. No. M-11373 of 2013 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.
Case No. : Crl. Misc. No. M-11373 of 2013
Date of Decision : May 24, 2013
Mandeep Singh @ Khanna .... Petitioner
Vs.
State of Punjab and another .... Respondents
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE L. N. MITTAL
* * *
Present : Mr. S. S. Swaich, Advocate
for the petitioner.
Mr. Roopam Aggarwal, DAG, Punjab
for respondent no. 1.
Mr. F. S. Virk, Advocate
for respondent no. 2.
* * *
L. N. MITTAL, J. (Oral) :
Accused Mandeep Singh @ Khanna has filed this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short - Cr.P.C.) for quashing FIR No.219 dated 20.10.2008 (Annexure P-1), under Section 326 of the Indian Penal Code (in short - IPC), registered at Police Station City Khanna, Police District Khanna, District Ludhiana, in view of compromise (Annexure P-2) effected with respondent no. 2 - complainant.
I have heard counsel for the parties and perused the case file. Crl. Misc. No. M-11373 of 2013 2 Counsel for respondent no.2 - complainant, on instructions from respondent no.2, said to be present in person in the Court, stated that parties have effected compromise (Annexure P-2), and therefore, respondent no. 2 has no objection, if the impugned FIR is quashed.
In appropriate cases, FIR can be quashed on the basis of compromise by exercising inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C., even if the offences are not compoundable. It was so held by Full Bench of this Court in case of Kulwinder Singh vs. State of Punjab reported as 2007 (3) Law Herald (Punjab and Haryana) 2225.
In the instant case, petitioner - accused is husband of sister of respondent no. 2 - complainant. Compromise has been effected with intervention of relatives and respectables. Pursuant to compromise, respondent no. 2 - complainant had also agreed to withdraw the suit filed by him claiming compensation and damages. It is stated that the said suit has also since been withdrawn. Accordingly, it is a fit case in which FIR should be quashed so that the parties may maintain their close relationship harmoniously.
Resultantly, the instant petition is allowed and impugned FIR Annexure P-1 is quashed along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom.
May 24, 2013 ( L. N. MITTAL ) monika JUDGE