Punjab-Haryana High Court
Aman Deep Singh vs State Of Punjab And Others on 3 May, 2012
Author: Ritu Bahri
Bench: Ritu Bahri
CRM No.M-7816 of 2011 1
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CRM No.M-7816 of 2011
Date of decision:03.05.2012
Aman Deep Singh
...Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab and others
...Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE Ms. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI
Present: Mr.Pankaj Sharma, Advocate,
for the petitioner.
Ms. Gagan Mohni, AAG, Punjab.
Mr.Amit Jaiswal, Advocate for
Mr.Sunil K. Rana, Advocate,
for the complainant.
RITU BAHRI, J. (Oral)
Quashing of FIR No.25 dated 25.2.2008 registered under Sections 279/337 of IPC at Police Station Morinda, District Ropar and Section 181 of the Motor Vehicle Act and the proceedings consequential thereto are being sought on the basis of compromise dated 25.2.2008 and 5.3.2011, Annexure P-2 and Annexure P-3, respectively.
As per allegations in the FIR, the petitioner was driving the jeep bearing Registration Number RRK-2738 and met with an accident with the father of respondent No.3 Karnail Singh. After the accident, the FIR was lodged against the petitioner.
After presentation of challan at the stage of recording evidence, the parties have entered into a compromise. The petitioner CRM No.M-7816 of 2011 2 and father of respondent No.3 Karnail Singh are the residents of the same village.
Earlier compromise was effected between the parties on 25.2.2008, which was signed by the petitioner and complainant- Karnail Singh. Complainant Karnail Singh expired on 30.8.2008 and his death certificate is annexed as Annexure P-3 with the petition. The son of the petitioner was witness to this compromise. Thereafter a compromise dated 5.3.2011 was effected with the son, which is annexed as Annexure P-4. During the pendency of the petition, the son of the complainant died on 24.1.2012. A copy of death certificate dated 9.2.2012 is taken on record as Annexure `A'.
The said facts are not disputed by counsel appearing for respondent No.3. He has further informed the Court that after the death of Jagdish Singh, his wife has not come forward to be part of the proceedings. However, he does not dispute that prior to his death, compromise has been effected.
The compromise dated 25.2.2008 (Annexure P-2) was witnessed by the son of the complainant and subsequent compromise dated 5.3.2011 (Annexure P-4) also bears his signatures.
After going through both the compromise and keeping in view the fact that matter has now been amicably settled, no useful purpose would be served in prolonging the criminal trial in which the wife of Jagdish Singh has expressed her unwillingness to be part of the proceedings.
Consequently, in view of the judgment of the Hon'ble CRM No.M-7816 of 2011 3 Supreme Court in the case of Madan Mohan Abbot vs. State of Punjab (supra) and the law laid down by the Full Bench of this Court in the case of Kulwinder Singh and Ors. vs. State of Punjab and another (supra), FIR No.25 dated 25.2.2008 registered under Sections 279/337 of IPC at Police Station Morinda, District Ropar and Section 181 of the Motor Vehicle Act and the proceedings consequential thereto are quashed qua the petitioners.
The petition stands disposed of.
03.05.2012 (RITU BAHRI) mks JUDGE