Punjab-Haryana High Court
Sawaran Singh Foaji vs State Of Punjab And Another on 4 April, 2013
Author: Naresh Kumar Sanghi
Bench: Naresh Kumar Sanghi
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-39158-2012 (O&M)
Date of Decision: April 4, 2013
Sawaran Singh Foaji
...Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab and another
...Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARESH KUMAR SANGHI
Present: Mr. Gurbir Singh Pannu, Advocate,
with Sawaran Singh, petitioner-in-person,
for the petitioner.
Mr. Sandeep Chhabra, DAG, Punjab,
for respondent No. 1.
Respondent No. 2-Ram Singh in person.
NARESH KUMAR SANGHI, J.
1. Prayer in this petition is for quashing of FIR No. 171, dated 2.12.2012, under Section 336, IPC, and Section 25 of the Arms Act, registered at Police Station, Laddowal, District Ludhiana, and the consequential proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise.
2. Vide order dated 27.2.2013, the affected parties were directed to appear before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ludhiana, for getting their respective statements recorded with regard to the compromise. The said Court was also directed to send a detailed report in that regard along with copies of the statements on or before the date fixed by this Court.
3. In compliance of the above, the petitioner, Sawaran CRM-M-39158-2012 (O&M) 2 Singh Foaji, son of Mukhtiar Singh, as well as respondent No. 2, Ram Singh, son of Ranjit Singh did appear before the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ludhiana, and got recorded their respective statements with regard to the compromise. Respondent No. 2 stated that he had compromised the matter with the petitioner with his free will. He also admitted the execution of the compromise (Ex. C-1). Similar statement was suffered by the petitioner, Sawaran Singh.
4. The report received from the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ludhiana, reveals that the private parties had compromised with each other out of their free will.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondent-complainant has sorted out his dispute with the petitioner and effected a compromise without any pressure or coercion. He further submits that the offences alleged to have been levelled against the petitioner were personal in nature. He also submits that no injury was caused to any person by means of two bullets alleged to have been fired by the petitioner. He further submits that after the incident the petitioner and respondent No. 2- complainant are peacefully residing and no un-toward incident had taken place. He further submits that the affected parties did appear before the learned Court below and got recorded their respective statements with regard to the compromise. He further submits that pendency of the FIR and the consequential proceedings emanating therefrom would be sheer abuse of the process of law since the chances of ultimate conviction and sentence of the petitioners are bleak.
CRM-M-39158-2012 (O&M) 3
6. Respondent No. 2-complainant, Ram Singh, is present in the Court, who has been identified by HC Swaran Singh of Police Station, Laddowal, District Ludhiana. Ram Singh admits the factum of the compromise and has no objection if the impugned FIR and the consequential proceedings emanating therefrom are quashed.
7. Learned counsel for the State on instructions from Swaran Singh of Police Station, Laddowal, District Ludhiana, admits the factum of the compromise. He has also gone through the report submitted by the learned Court below and the copies of the statements suffered by the private parties and has no objection if the impugned FIR and the consequential proceedings are quashed on the basis of the compromise.
8. Heard.
9. As per the allegations levelled in the FIR, the petitioner had fired two gun shots in the air, which did not hit anyone. Respondent No. 2-complainant, Ram Singh, has sorted out his dispute with the petitioner and effected a compromise. Ram Singh is present in the Court and has admitted the factum of the compromise. The learned counsel for the respondents have admitted the factum of the compromise. On the directions of this Court, the private parties did appear before the learned Court below and got recorded their respective statements with regard to the compromise. The copies of the statements suffered by the private parties have already been received from the learned Court below. The report received from the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ludhiana, reveals that respondent No. 2- complainant, Ram Singh, and the petitioner-accused, Sawaran CRM-M-39158-2012 (O&M) 4 Singh, have effected compromised with each other out of their free will. The pendency of the impugned FIR and the consequential proceedings would be sheer abuse of the process of law since the chances of ultimate conviction and sentence are bleak.
10. Keeping in view the totality of the circumstances of the case, the factum of the compromise effected between the private parties and the ratio of the judgment rendered by a 5-Judge Bench of this Court in the case of Kulwinder Singh and others v. State of Punjab and another, 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052, this petition is allowed and FIR No. 171, dated 2.12.2012, under Section 336, IPC, and Section 25 of the Arms Act, registered at Police Station, Laddowal, District Ludhiana, and the consequential proceedings arising therefrom are hereby quashed.
(NARESH KUMAR SANGHI)
April 4, 2013 JUDGE
Pkapoor