Sonu And ORS v. State Of Punjab And ANR
[292]
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH [1] CRM-M-5210-2024 Date of decision : 15.04.2024 Sonu and others ...... Petitioners versus State of Punjab and another ...... Respondents [2] Lal Kumar and others ...... Petitioners versus State of Punjab and another ...... Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ JAIN
Present:
Mr. Piyush Setia, Advocate for the petitioners in CRM-M-5210-2024 and for respondents No.2 in CRM-M-5216-2024.
Mr. Jaswinder Singh Arora, DAG, Punjab.
Mr. Shubham Goyal, Advocate for the petitioners in CRM-M-5216-2024 and for respondents No.2 in CRM-M-5210-2024.
**** PANKAJ JAIN, J. (Oral) By way of present petitions, the petitioners are seeking quashing of cross case/GD No.36 dated 01.06.2023, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 341, 148 and 149 of IPC at Police Station Division No.8, District Jalandhar and FIR No.58 dated 21.03.2023 for the offence punishable under Sections 323, 341, 148, 149 of IPC (Section 452 of IPC added later on vide GD Entry No.37, dated
24.03.2023) at Police Station Division No.8, District Jalandhar, on the basis of compromise deed dated 09.01.2024 (Annexure P-3). 2.
These are matters arising out of version and cross-version. 3.
On 01.02.2024, the following order was passed:- "
The present petition has been moved invoking jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. by the petitioner seeking quashing of cross case General Diary No.36 dated 01.06.2023 under Sections 323, 341, 148, 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 registered at Police Station Division No.8, District Jalandhar in case FIR No.58 dated 21.03.2023, registered for offences punishable under Sections 323, 341, 148, 149 (Section 452 IPC added later on vide GD entry No.37 dated 24.03.2023) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 at Police Station Division No.8, District Jalandhar and all subsequent proceedings arising thereto on the basis of compromise.
Ld. Counsel for the petitioners contends that the matter already stands compromised vide Annexure P-3. Notice of motion for 15.04.2024.
Mr. Tarun Aggarwal, Sr. DAG, Punjab appears and accepts notice on behalf of respondent No.1-State. Mr. Shubham Goyal, Advocate appears and accepts notice on behalf of respondent No.2 and admits the fact of there being a compromise between the parties. In view of the above, the parties are directed to appear before learned Illaqa Magistrate/Duty Magistrate on 20.02.2024. On their doing so, the learned Illaqa Magistrate/Duty Magistrate shall record their statements and furnish its report to this Court by the next date of hearing on the following aspects:-
1. Number of persons arrayed as accused in the GD/FIR.
2. Whether any accused is proclaimed offender?
3. Whether the compromise is genuine, voluntary and without any coercion or undue influence?
4. Whether the accused persons are involved in any other case or not?
5. The Illaqa Magistrate is also directed to record the statement of the Investigating Officer as to how many victims/ complainants are there in the GD/FIR.
A copy of the report be also sent to the Registrar Judicial of this Court.
Needless to say that in case for any reason the statements are not recorded on the aforesaid date, the learned Illaqa Magistrate/Duty Magistrate shall be at liberty to call the parties on any other date but not later than a week thereafter."
4.
Pursuant to the aforesaid order, report from the learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Jalandhar dated 15.03.2024 has been received, which is taken on record. As per the report, the trial Court has recorded as follows:- "xx xx xx Report of this Court as follows:- (i) Seven persons namely Sonu, Ram Lal, Shashi Bala, Mani @ Naina, Deep Kumar, Deepak @ Deepu and Laxmi have been arrayed as accused in the present GD.
(ii) None of the accused has been declared proclaimed offender in this case.
(iii) The compromise between the complainant Lal Kumar and aforesaid accused persons Sonu, Ram Lal, Shashi Bala, Mani @ Naina, Deep Kumar, Deepak @ Deepu and Laxmi is found to be genuine, voluntary and without any undue influence or coercion.
(iv) As per the statement of IO no other FIR is pending against any of the accused.
(v) As per the statement of IO there is only one complainant/aggrieved person namely Lal Kumar in the present case."
"xx xx xx "
5.
Counsel appears for respondents in both the cases, admits the fact of parties having compromised and states that they have no objection in case the FIR and all proceedings subsequent thereto against the petitioners are quashed.
6.
Similarly learned State counsel has stated no objection in case the FIR is quashed based upon the compromise deed (Annexure P-3). 7.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have carefully gone through the records of the case.
! ! "
# ! "
!" # $%
&''()* +
+ , - - ") % -"
.)
/ -
- ") ") 0..
) # /'$ 1 $ .
" "" 2 + 0 3
4 + 5
06- ,'/
! !
"
$
!
"
#
$
%#"
"% % &
# "
'
( "
#
#)# "
"
%#% "
% %
%'
% # %
%" % "
$ "
&
"
%#
% "
%'
! "
!
"
"
" #
* %%+
# " #
!,"
&
% #
%
( -+.
/
% -+.
#
*
!
*
% % % "
"
&
#
% "
% %
%%
# #
% #
# %
&
%
%%
# # 0% ( #-+.1" %
"
! #
(
!
#
# "%
"
% &' ( !
&
( )
*+, $# $ "
%% & " !"# 7 "
$ %% #
"
$ " "
,"
"
"
%
"%
"
"
% 10.
Consequently, the petitions are allowed. Cross case/GD No.36 dated 01.06.2023, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 341, 148 and 149 of IPC at Police Station Division No.8, District Jalandhar and FIR No.58 dated 21.03.2023 for the offence punishable under Sections 323, 341, 148, 149 of IPC (Section 452 of IPC added later on vide GD Entry No.37, dated 24.03.2023) at Police Station Division No.8, District Jalandhar, and all proceedings arising therefrom, are, hereby, quashed qua the petitioners. 11.
A photocopy of this order be placed on the file of other connected case.
(PANKAJ JAIN) JUDGE 15.04.2024 'R. Sharma'
Whether speaking/reasoned :
Yes Whether Reportable :
No