Punjab-Haryana High Court
Sardul Singh And Others vs State Of Punjab And Another on 12 December, 2017
Author: Inderjit Singh
Bench: Inderjit Singh
In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh
......
Criminal Misc. No.M-41012 of 2017
.....
Date of decision:12.12.2017
Sardul Singh and others
.....Petitioners
v.
State of Punjab and another
.....Respondents
....
Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Inderjit Singh
.....
Present: Mr. M.S. Saini, Advocate for Mr. Ajaypal Singh Madaan,
Advocate for the petitioners.
Ms. Simranjeet Kaur, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab
for the respondent-State.
Mr. Prappan Uppal, Advocate for Mr. Ashish Puri, Advocate for
complainant-respondent No.2.
.....
Inderjit Singh, J.
This petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. praying for quashing of FIR No.84 dated 7.8.2012 (Annexure-P.1) registered for the offences under Sections 323, 324, 506 and 34 IPC at Police Station Mehatpur, District Jalandhar and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom in view of the compromise (Annexure-P.2).
The FIR has been registered on the statement of complainant- Manjit Singh on the allegations that the accused-petitioners attacked him and inflicted injuries. 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 - 16-12-2017 07:13:43 ::: Cr. Misc. No.M-41012 of 2017 [2] Keeping in view the fact that the parties have entered into a compromise, they were directed to appear before learned trial Court for getting their statements recorded in support of the compromise. After doing the needful, learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Nakodar has sent report dated 17.11.2017 submitting that the compromise arrived at between the parties is without any pressure or coercion from any one and the same is genuine one.
Learned Assistant Advocate General, Punjab, 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 as well as learned State counsel and have gone through the record.
In a decision, based on compromise, none of the parties is a loser. Rather, 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.
Therefore, keeping in view the fact that the matter has been amicably settled and in view of the law laid by the Hon'ble Supreme Court 2 of 3 ::: Downloaded on - 16-12-2017 07:13:44 ::: Cr. Misc. No.M-41012 of 2017 [3] in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and another, 2012 (4) RCR (Cr.) 543, this petition is allowed and FIR No.84 dated 7.8.2012 (Annexure-P.1) registered for the offences under Sections 323, 324, 506 and 34 IPC at Police Station Mehatpur, District Jalandhar and all subsequent proceedings arising out of the same are hereby quashed qua the petitioners.
December 12, 2017. (Inderjit Singh)
Judge
*hsp*
NOTE: Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes
Whether reportable: No
3 of 3
::: Downloaded on - 16-12-2017 07:13:44 :::