Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 6, Cited by 0]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Prabhjit Singh vs State Of Punjab And Another on 23 October, 2018

Author: Surinder Gupta

Bench: Surinder Gupta

CRM-M-28921-2018                                                           -1-


           IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
                       AT CHANDIGARH

                                        Crl. Misc. No. M-28921 of 2018 (O&M)
                                        Date of decision: October 23, 2018

Prabhjit Singh
                                                          .. Petitioners
                                 Versus

State of Punjab and another
                                                          .. Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURINDER GUPTA

Present:    Mr. Raj Bikram Rai, Advocate
            for the petitioner.

            Mr. D.S.Sukarchakia, D.A.G., Punjab.

            Mr. Gaurav Mannan, Advocate
            for respondent No.2-complainant.

SURINDER GUPTA, J.(Oral)

The petitioner has filed this petition under Section 482 Code of Criminal Procedure (for short, 'Cr.P.C.') seeking quashing of FIR No. 100 dated 30.08.2017 (Annexure P-1), registered for offences punishable under Sections 452, 506, 427 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code (for short 'IPC') at Police Station Sadar Batala, District Batala along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of the compromise (Annexure P-2).

As per case of the prosecution, petitioner along with other accused entered the house of complainant in order to cause injuries but the complainant did not come out. Feeling enraged the petitioner had broken window panes and damaged the other house hold articles.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the matter has since been settled vide compromise, copy of which has been placed on file 1 of 2 ::: Downloaded on - 24-03-2019 23:58:05 ::: CRM-M-28921-2018 -2- as Annexure P-2.

Learned counsel for respondent No.2-complainant endorses the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner and has no objection if the impugned FIR (Annexure P-1) is quashed.

Learned State counsel has also not disputed the compromise (Annexure P-2).

In order to verify the veracity and genuineness of the settlement between the parties, they were directed to appear before the trial court and get their statements recorded. The trial court has sent its report dated 13.10.2018 stating therein that the compromise has been effected between the complainant and the accused which appears to be voluntary in nature and without any pressure or influence.

Keeping all the above facts in view, I am of the considered opinion that it is a fit case in which the impugned FIR should be quashed. Keeping the case pending will not serve the ends of justice. The quashing of the FIR will provide the parties to this petition an opportunity to live in an amicable, peaceful and harmonious atmosphere which is not only in the interest of the parties but also for their families and ultimately the society at large.

For the reasons as discussed above, the instant petition is allowed and FIR No. 100 dated 30.08.2017, registered at Police Station Sadar Batala, District Batala (Annexure P-1) along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, qua petitioner, is quashed.



                                                       (SURINDER GUPTA)
October 23, 2018                                            JUDGE
Jyoti-II
             Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No
             Whether Reportable:        Yes/No
                               2 of 2
            ::: Downloaded on - 24-03-2019 23:58:06 :::