Harmanpreet Singh v. State Of Punjab And Others
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.
Sr. No.227(2) Case No. : CRM-M-6990-2023 Date of Decision : March 17, 2023 Harmanpreet Singh ....
Petitioner vs.
State of Punjab and others ....
Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURBIR SINGH.
* * *
Present:
Mr. Ramandeep Singh Brar, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. G.S. Shergill, AAG, Punjab.
Mr. Amit Dhawan, Advocate for respondents no.2 and 3.
* * * GURBIR SINGH, J (ORAL) Petitioners have filed this petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of cross version vide DDR No.34 dated 18.03.2020, under Sections 323, 324 and 34 of IPC, registered at Police Station Shahkot, District Jalandhar (Rural), in case FIR No.12 dated 23.01.2020, under Sections 323, 324, 34 and 201 of IPC, registered at Police Station Shahkot, Jalandhar (Rural), on the basis of compromise (Annexure P-4). Upon notice, respondents no.2 and 3 had appeared through counsel on the last date of hearing and admitted the factum of compromise effected between the parties.
Vide order dated 10.02.2023, parties were directed to appear before the Trial Court/Duty Magistrate and get their statements recorded
with regard to the compromise and the Court below was directed to send a report regarding the compromise.
Now report dated 09.03.2023 has been received. The same is ordered to be taken on record.
Learned State counsel has also filed the Status Report by way of affidavit of Gurpreet Singh, PPS, Deputy Superintendent of Police, Sub Division Shahkot, District Jalandhar (Rural), on behalf of respondent No.1State of Punjab. The same is also taken on record. Copy thereof has been supplied to the counsel opposite.
It has been stated in the Status Report that on the basis of statement of Sarabjit Singh (respondent No.2 in the instant petition), the cross-case vide DDR No.34 dated 18.03.2020 in case FIR No.12 dated 23.01.2020 was registered against Harmanpreet Singh (petitioner in the present case), Surjit Singh Virk and Ravinder Singh @ Ninda for causing injuries to him and Surinder Singh Boughan @ Surinder Singh (respondent No.3 in the instant petition).
It has been further submitted that challan qua the accused persons in FIR No.12 dated 23.01.2020 and also in cross-case, has been filed before the learned Trial Court.
The present petitioner is facing trial and the case is pending for procuring presence of remaining two accused, namely, Surjit Singh Virk and Ravinder Singh @ Ninda. The main FIR has already been ordered to be quashed. Now the question arises whether the FIR can be quashed against the petitioner, when summons are being issued to procure the presence of the other two accused.
In a judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in Lovely Salhotra and another vs. State (NCT of Delhi) reported as (2018) 12 SCC 391, it has been observed as under:- "
xx xx xx We have taken into account the facts of the matter in question as it appears to us that no cognizable offence is made out against the appellants - herein. The High Court was wrong in holding that the F.I.R. cannot be quashed in part and it ought to have appreciated the fact that the appellants - herein cannot be allowed to suffer on the basis of the complaint filed by Respondent No.2 - herein only on the ground that the investigation against co-accused is still pending. It is pertinent to note that the learned Magistrate has opined that no offence is made out against co-accused Nos.2, 3, 4 and 6 prima facie."
Consequently, the present petition is allowed and the impugned cross-version, registered vide DDR No.34 dated 18.03.2020, under Sections 323, 324 and 34 of IPC, at Police Station Shahkot, District Jalandhar (Rural), in case FIR No.12 dated 23.01.2020, under Sections 323, 324, 34 and 201 of IPC, registered at Police Station Shahkot, Jalandhar (Rural), is hereby quashed along with all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise, qua the petitioner only. March 17, 2023 (GURBIR SINGH) monika JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned ?
Yes/No.
Whether reportable ?
Yes/No.