High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/8561/2024disposed of

Parvesh v. State Of Haryana And Another

2024-07-29Mr. Justice Jasjit Singh Bedi2 pages

CRM-M-8561-2024

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CRM-M-8561-2024 Date of decision: 29.07.2024 PARVESH .... PETITIONER(S)

VERSUS

STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER ...RESPONDENT(S) CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASJIT SINGH BEDI

Present:

Mr. Satish Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner(s).

Mr. Deepak Grewal, DAG, Haryana.

Mr. Pal Singh, Advocate for respondent No.2.

**** JASJIT SINGH BEDI, J. (Oral) The prayer in this petition is for quashing of an FIR No.04 dated 03.01.2017 (Annexure P-1) registered under Sections 323, 324, 34, 506 of the IPC, 1860 at Police Station Israna, District Panipat along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom on the basis of a compromise arrived at between the petitioner and respondent No.2. Vide order dated 06.03.2024 this Court had directed the parties to appear before Illaqa Magistrate for getting their statements recorded with regard to the compromise dated 26.01.2024 (Annexure P-2). The Illaqa Magistrate/trial Court was to submit a report in this regard giving certain details as enumerated in the said order. Pursuant to the order dated 06.03.2024 passed by this Court, the parties have appeared before the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Panipat and as per the report dated 03.06.2024 submitted to this Court, both KUSUM 2024.07.30 10:44 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment Punjab & Haryana High Court, CHD

CRM-M-8561-2024 the parties have got recorded their respective statements in Court. A perusal of the aforesaid report would show that the parties have effected a genuine and voluntary compromise without there being any pressure, coercion or undue influence. In view of the compromise there is a remote possibility of the complaint coming forward to support the prosecution case. The powers under Section 482 Cr.PC can be exercised in such like situation in order to prevent unnecessary vagaries of criminal trial to be faced by the parties, when there are remote chances of conviction of the accused. The compromise in question is found to be fully in consonance with the direction issued by the Court in "Kulwinder Singh & Ors. Vs. State of Punjab 2007(3) RCR (Criminal) 1052 and Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab & Anr., 2012(4) RCR (Crl.) 543".

In view of the aforesaid report of the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Panipat accompanied by statements of both the parties, the FIR No.04 dated 03.01.2017 (Annexure P-1) registered under Sections 323, 324, 34, 506 of the IPC, 1860 along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom are hereby quashed qua the petitioner, only. Petition stands disposed of.

(JASJIT SINGH BEDI) JUDGE 29.07.2024 Kusum Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No KUSUM 2024.07.30 10:44 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment Punjab & Haryana High Court, CHD