Surinder Pal v. State Of Punjab And ORS

In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh ......

Criminal Misc. No.M-11877 of 2016 .....

Date of decision:30.5.2016 Surinder Pal .....Petitioner v.

State of Punjab and others .....Respondents ....

Coram:

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Inderjit Singh .....

Present:

Mr. Parvinder Singh, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Sandeep Kr. Bansal, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab for the respondent-State.

Mr. Munish Khanngwal, Advocate for the complainantrespondents No.2 and 3. .....

Inderjit Singh, J.

This petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. praying for quashing of FIR No.143 dated 15.12.2010 (Annexure-P.1) registered for the offences under Sections 279, 337 and 427 IPC at Police Station City S.B.S. Nagar, District S.B.S. Nagar and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom in view of the compromise (Annexure-P.2). The FIR has been registered on the statement of complainantIndu Thakur on the allegations that the accused-petitioner, while driving his Maruti car negligently and rashly, without giving any horn and without giving any signal struck the same on the right side of their motorcycle due to which the complainant and her husband received injuries. Now with the

Cr. Misc. No.M-11877 of 2016 [2] intervention of respectable persons, the matter has been amicably compromised between the parties and they have resolved their disputes and differences.

Keeping in view the fact that the parties have entered into a compromise, they were directed to appear before learned trial Court for getting their statements recorded in support of the compromise. After doing the needful, learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Shaheed Bhagat Singh Nagar has sent his report dated 23.5.2016 submitting that the compromise arrived at between the parties is without any pressure or coercion from any one and the same is genuine one. Learned Assistant Advocate General, Punjab, on instructions from the Investigating Officer and learned counsel for the respondents No.2 and 3 admit the factum of compromise and submit that in case the parties have indeed settled their dispute, the State would have no objection to the quashing of the FIR in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court.

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Assistant Advocate General, Punjab and learned counsel for the respondents No.2 and 3 and have gone through the record. In a decision, based on compromise, none of the parties is a loser. Rather, compromise not only brings peace and harmony between the parties to a dispute, but also restores tranquility in the society. After considering the nature of offences allegedly committed and the fact that both the parties have amicably settled their dispute, continuance of criminal

Cr. Misc. No.M-11877 of 2016 [3] prosecution would be an exercise in futility, as the chances of ultimate conviction are bleak.

Therefore, keeping in view the fact that the matter has been amicably settled and in view of the law laid by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and another, 2012 (4) RCR (Cr.) 543, this petition is allowed and FIR No.143 dated 15.12.2010 (Annexure-P.1) registered for the offences under Sections 279, 337 and 427 IPC at Police Station City S.B.S. Nagar, District S.B.S. Nagar and all subsequent proceedings arising out of the same are hereby quashed. May 30, 2016.

(Inderjit Singh) Judge *hsp*