Sube Singh And Others v. State Of Haryana And Another

N.C. No.2024:PHHC:058129

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-6256-2024 (O&M) Date of decision: 29.04.2024 SUBE SINGH AND OTHERS ....Petitioner(s)

Versus

STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS

...Respondent(s)

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV BERRY Present :

Mr. Saurabh Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner(s). Mr. Dhruv Sihag, AAG Haryana.

 





   ***** SANJIV BERRY. J. (Oral) By way of present petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, petitioners seek quashing of FIR (Annexure P-1) and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of compromise/settlement dated 07.11.2023 (Annexure P-2) executed between the parties. Details of the FIR are as follows:

FIR No.

Dated Sections Police Station 09.07.2019 365 IPC;

(323, 342, 506 and 34 IPC added later on) Ladwa, District Kurukshetra 2.

With the intervention of respectables and elderly people of the society, the parties have arrived at a settlement vide compromise deed dated 07.11.2023 (Annexure P-2), which is duly signed by them. The matter was referred to the Court below for recording of statements of the parties and to report with respect to genuineness of the compromise arrived at between the parties. The learned  
       vide report dated 01.03.2024 SANDAL SHARMA 2024.04.30 17:53 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment

N.C. No.2024:PHHC:058129 CRM-M-6256-2024 (O&M) -2and 18.04.2024 has apprised this Court that the compromise arrived at between the parties is genuine and without any pressure. The petitioners have also deposited the cost of Rs.10,000/- in compliance to the order dated 06.02.2024. 3.

Respondent Nos.2 and 3 are represented by their counsel and do not oppose the compromise.

4.

In view of the aforesaid report of the learned  
  

, Kurukshetra and in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in "Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab and another", 2012(4) RCR (Criminal) 543 and "Narinder Singh and Others Vs. State of Punjab and Another", (2014) 6 SCC 466, this Court is of the opinion that no useful purpose can be served by keeping the criminal proceedings pending, since the complainant has himself compromised the dispute with the petitioners/ accused persons. ! "    #  FIR No.240 dated 09.07.2019 under Sections 365 IPC (323, 342, 506 and 34 IPC added later on) of IPC registered at Police Station Ladwa, District Kurukshetra$ %&'

() *      +,*    +  *  (SANJIV BERRY) JUDGE


 S.Sharma(syr) Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether reportable :

Yes/ No SANDAL SHARMA 2024.04.30 17:53 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment