Punjab-Haryana High Court
Baljeet Singh And Ors vs State Of Punjab And Anr on 24 September, 2019
Author: Anil Kshetarpal
Bench: Anil Kshetarpal
CRM-M-36564-2019 (O&M)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-36564-2019 (O&M).
Decided on : September 24, 2019.
Baljeet Singh and others
... Petitioners
Versus
State of Punjab and another
... Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KSHETARPAL
***
PRESENT Mr.Sandeep Bansal, Advocate and
Mr.Anubhav Bansal, Advocate, for
for the petitioners.
Mr.S.P.S.Tinna, Addl. A.G., Punjab.
Mr.Piyush Khanna, Advocate,
for respondent No.2 - complainant.
***
ANIL KSHETARPAL, J. (ORAL)
The petitioners have approached this Court by way of instant petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short 'Cr.P.C.') invoking its inherent jurisdiction for quashing of FIR No.5, dated 17.1.2019, registered under Sections 452, 341, 323, 506, 148, and 149 IPC (Section 295 IPC added later on), at Police Station Khanauri, District Sangrur and the consequential proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise.
1
1 of 3 ::: Downloaded on - 02-10-2019 02:58:11 ::: CRM-M-36564-2019 (O&M) Notice of motion was issued and the parties were directed to remain present in this Court on the next date of hearing.
Today, the petitioners-accused and respondent no.2, are present, duly identified by their respective counsels. They have filed their respective affidavits in the Court today with regard to the compromise/settlement, which are marked as 'A', 'B', 'C', 'D', 'E', 'F', 'G', 'H', 'I' and 'J'.
Counsel for the petitioners and counsel for the respondent no.2 pray that in view of the aforesaid facts, the FIR and all subsequent proceedings emanating therefrom be quashed.
Counsel for the State of Punjab states that in view of the settlement between the parties, the State would not stand in the way of the settlement and would not oppose the quashing of the FIR and all subsequent proceedings emanating therefrom.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties, perused the affidavits filed by the parties. I am of the considered opinion that the petitioners-accused and the respondent no.2 have resolved their differences by a bona fide compromise, without any coercion or undue influence. Both the parties acknowledges the settlement/compromise.
In the considered opinion of this Court, it is a fit case for exercising the inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C., so as to secure the ends of justice because the parties have arrived at an out of Court settlement by way of compromise. The compromise is without any pressure and a genuine one. In such a situation, continuation of the 2 2 of 3 ::: Downloaded on - 02-10-2019 02:58:12 ::: CRM-M-36564-2019 (O&M) prosecution would result in sheer abuse of process of law.
For the aforesaid view, this Court finds support from Kulwinder Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab and another, 2007(3) RCR (Criminal) 1052 and Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab and others (2012) 10 SCC 303.
Considering the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case noted above, coupled with the reasons aforementioned and to secure the ends of justice, FIR No.5, dated 17.1.2019, registered under Sections 452, 341, 323, 506, 148, and 149 and (Section 295 IPC added later on), at Police Station Khanauri, District Sangrur and the consequential proceedings arising therefrom are ordered to be quashed, however, qua the petitioners only.
Resultantly, with the above-said observations made, the instant petition stands allowed.
(ANIL KSHETARPAL) JUDGE September 24, 2019.
raj arora
Whether speaking/reasoned? Yes/No
Whether reportable? Yes/No
3
3 of 3
::: Downloaded on - 02-10-2019 02:58:12 :::