Punjab-Haryana High Court
Jagdev Singh And Others vs State Of Punjab And Another on 14 July, 2014
Author: Rekha Mittal
Bench: Rekha Mittal
CRM-M-30759-2013 1
IN THE PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-30759-2013
Date of decision : 14.07.2014
Jagdev Singh and others
... Petitioners
Versus
State of Punjab and another
... Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE REKHA MITTAL
Present: Mr.G.B.S.Dhillon, Advocate
for the petitioners.
Mr.Neeraj Sharma, AAG, Punjab.
None for respondent No.2.
REKHA MITTAL, J.(ORAL)
The petitioners have prayed for quashing of FIR No.124 dated 21.08.2013 for offence under Sections 307, 498-A, 341, 323, 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (in short "IPC") registered at Police Station Sarabha Nagar, District Ludhiana on the basis of compromise 27.08.2013 (Annexure P2) effected between the parties.
The parties were directed to appear before the trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate on 22.10.2013 to get their statements recorded with regard to genuineness of compromise.
A report has been submitted by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ludhiana, wherein it has been reported that the statements of the petitioners and respondent No.2(complainant) have been recorded and the statements made by the parties in the Court reveal that they have voluntarily entered Davinder Kumar 2014.07.18 15:59 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-30759-2013 2 into a compromise with an intention to live in peace and harmony.
Counsel for the petitioners contends that injury constituting offence under Section 307 IPC is simple in nature, in view of medical opinion. The dispute has arisen out of marital discord between the complainant, her husband Jagdev Singh Sekhon and his family members. The challan has not been presented in the Court and the parties have decided to bury their hatchet before commencement of trial proceedings. Kawaljit Kaur Sekhon complainant has entered into a compromise, therefore, possibility of her supporting the cause of prosecution during trial is negligible rendering the chances of conviction to be remote and bleak in case the petitioners are subject to those proceedings.
Counsel for the State has not disputed correctness of assertions of the petitioners that the matter has been settled by way of compromise between the parties. He has also not denied that injuries sustained by the complainant are simple in nature and there is marital dispute between the parties.
I have heard counsel for the parties and perused the case file. There is nothing on record to doubt correctness of the compromise effected between the parties, whereby they have decided to settle their dispute with an intention to live in peace and harmony. The present case falls in the category of cases, which can be allowed to be settled by way of compromise, in view of the decision of Hon'ble the Supreme Court of India in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and another, 2012(4) R.C.R. (Criminal) 543.
In view of what has been discussed hereinabove, the petition is Davinder Kumar 2014.07.18 15:59 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-30759-2013 3 allowed and FIR No.124 dated 21.08.2013 for offence under Sections 307, 498-A, 341, 323, 506 read with Section 34 IPC registered at Police Station Sarabha Nagar, District Ludhiana and proceedings emanating therefrom are ordered to be quashed, qua the petitioners.
(REKHA MITTAL) JUDGE July 14, 2014.
Davinder Kumar Davinder Kumar 2014.07.18 15:59 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document