Punjab-Haryana High Court
Gagandeep Sharma And Others vs State Of Punjab And Others on 9 December, 2013
Author: Ram Chand Gupta
Bench: Ram Chand Gupta
CRM M-35828 of 2013 -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH.
(1)
Crl. Misc. No. M-35828 of 2013 (O&M)
Date of Decision: December 09, 2013.
Gagandeep Sharma and others
.......PETITIONER(s).
VERSUS
State of Punjab and others
.....RESPONDENT(s).
(2)
Crl. Misc. No. M-35876 of 2013 (O&M)
Lakhwinder Kumar and others
.......PETITIONER(s).
VERSUS
State of Punjab and others
.....RESPONDENT(s).
CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAM CHAND GUPTA
Present: Ms. Jatinder Kaur, Advocate
for the petitioners in CRM-M No.35828 of 2013 and
for respondents No.2 to 7 in CRM-M No.35876 of 2013.
Mr. R.S. Randhawa, Addl.A.G., Punjab.
Mr. Gopal Singh Nahel, Advocate
for respondents No.2 to 6 in CRM-M No.35828 of 2013
and for petitioners in CRM-M No.35876 of 2013.
*******
Mehta Sachin
2013.12.10 11:40
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
CHANDIGARH
CRM M-35828 of 2013 -2-
RAM CHAND GUPTA, J.(Oral)
This order will dispose of both the afore-mentioned petitions filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing of FIR No.82 dated 29.05.2013 under Sections 326, 323, 324, 427, 506, 148 read with Section 149 of Indian Penal Code (for short 'IPC'), registered at Police Station Moonak, District Sangrur alongwith all other consequential proceedings arising therefrom as well as cross-case i.e. DDR No.31 dated 30.05.2013 under Sections 326, 323, 324, 427, 506, 148 read with Section 149 of IPC recorded in the said FIR alongwith all other consequential proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise, having been entered between the parties.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record.
It has been stated by learned counsel for the parties that it is a case of version and cross-version and the dispute between the parties has since been settled due to intervention of respectable persons and relatives from both the sides.
As per directions of this Court, both the parties appeared before learned trial Court and got their statements recorded. Report alongwith statements of the parties has been received from learned trial Court to the effect that compromise is without any pressure or coercion from any side.
Mehta Sachin 2013.12.10 11:40 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CHANDIGARH CRM M-35828 of 2013 -3-
In appropriate cases FIR can be quashed on the basis of compromise by exercising power under Section 482 Cr.P.C., even if the offences are not compoundable. It was so held by Full Bench of this Court in the case of Kulwinder Singh v. State of Punjab, 2007(3) RCR (Crl.) 1052.
Hence, in the interest of harmonious relations between the parties, both the afore-mentioned petitions are allowed and the impugned FIR No. 82 dated 29.05.2013 under Sections 326, 323, 324, 427, 506, 148 read with Section 149 of Indian Penal Code (for short 'IPC'), registered at Police Station Moonak, District Sangrur alongwith all consequential proceedings qua petitioners Gagandeep Sharma, Ravinder Sharma, Mani, Gagandeep Singh, Jagtar Singh, Rajinder Singh and cross-case DDR No.31 dated 30.05.2013 under Sections 326, 323, 324, 427, 506, 148 read with Section 149 of IPC recorded in the said FIR alongwith all consequential proceedings qua petitioners Lakhwinder Kumar, Lakhwinder Singh, Jasvir Singh, Sukhwinder Singh, Rajinder Singh and Ranjit Singh are, hereby, quashed.
( RAM CHAND GUPTA ) December 09, 2013. JUDGE Sachin M. Mehta Sachin 2013.12.10 11:40 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CHANDIGARH