Punjab-Haryana High Court
Vijay Kumar Sharma & Ors vs State Of Punjab & Anr on 21 August, 2015
Author: Hari Pal Verma
Bench: Hari Pal Verma
CRM-M-24498 of 2015 -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH.
CRM-M-24498 of 2015
Date of decision: 21.08.2015
Vijay Kumar Sharma and others ----Petitioner(s)
V/s
State of Punjab & another -----Respondent(s)
CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARI PAL VERMA
1. Whether reporters of local newspapers may be allowed to see
judgment?
2. To be referred to reporters or not?
3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?
Present:- Ms. Majari Joshi, Advocate for
Mr. Rajiv Joshi, Advocate for the petitioners.
Mr. Gurinderjit Singh, DAG, Punjab.
Mr. Rajesh Bansal, Advocate for respondent No.2-
complainant.
---
HARI PAL VERMA, J. (Oral)
Prayer in this petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is for quashing of FIR No. 95, dated 25.06.2011 for offence under Sections 420, 425, 483, 486 and 120-B IPC and Sections 51 and 63 of the Copy Right Act, 1957, registered at Police Station, Division No.8, Jalandhar, and all the proceedings subsequent arising thereto on the basis of compromise dated 08.05.2015 (Annexure P-2).
This Court vide order dated 28.07.2015, had directed the parties to appear before the Illaqa Magistrate/trial Court to get their statements recorded and the Illaqa Magistrate/trial Court was further directed to submit its report about the genuineness of the compromise, as per the statements of the parties so recorded.
ANJAL GUPTA2015.08.25 14:14 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document high court chandigarh CRM-M-24498 of 2015 -2-
Accordingly, the parties have appeared before learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Jalandhar, and got their statements recorded. On the basis of the statements, so recorded by the parties, learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Jalandhar, has submitted his report dated 19.08.2015, to the effect that the compromise entered between the parties is genuine, voluntary and the same has been effected without any coercion and undue influence.
Mr. Rajesh Bansal, Advocate has put in appearance on behalf for respondent No.2-complainant and does not dispute the factum of compromise entered between the parties.
In view of the above, no useful purpose would be served to continue with the proceedings before the trial Court in the instant FIR qua the petitioners.
Accordingly, following the principles laid down by the Full Bench judgment of this Court in Kulwinder Singh and others v. State of Punjab and another, 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052 (P&H) and approved by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab and others, (2012)10 SCC 303, this petition is allowed and FIR No.95, dated 25.06.2011 for offence under Sections 420, 425, 483, 486 and 120-B IPC and Sections 51 and 63 of the Copy Right Act, 1957, registered at Police Station, Division No.8, Jalandhar, and all the proceedings subsequent arising thereto on the basis of compromise dated 08.05.2015 (Annexure P-2), are hereby quashed.
August 21, 2015 ( HARI PAL VERMA )
Anjal JUDGE
ANJAL GUPTA
2015.08.25 14:14
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this document
high court chandigarh