Satpal Singh And ORS v. State Of Punjab And Another

PANKAJ KUMAR 2021.08.16 12:16 I am the author of this document -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M No.8276 of 2020 (O&M) Date of Decision:13.08.2021 (Heard through VC) Satpal Singh and others

...Petitioners

Versus

State of Punjab and another

...Respondents

CORAM:- HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JAISHREE THAKUR Present:- Mr. Ramandeep Singh, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. A.S. Gill, Sr. DAG, Punjab.

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

-.- JAISHREE THAKUR, J. (ORAL) C RM No.24117 of 2021 Prayer in the application is for preponing the date of hearing of the main petition, which is now fixed for 28.10.2021. For the reasons stated in the application, the same is allowed and the main petition is taken up for hearing today itself. CRM-M No.8276 of 2020 1.

This petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking quashing of FIR No.130 dated 25.07.2013 registered under Section 498-A, 406 of Indian Penal Code at Police Station Zira, District Ferozepur (Annexure P-1) and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom in view of the compromise dated 30.01.2020 (Annexure P-2 ).

-22.

The FIR has been registered on the statement of complainant on the allegations of ill-treatment and harassment at the hands of the petitioners on account of demand of dowry. Now with the intervention of respectable persons, the matter has been amicably compromised between the parties and they have resolved their disputes and differences. 3.

Keeping in view the fact that the parties have entered into a compromise, they were directed to appear before the trial court/Illaqa Magistrate for getting their statements recorded in support of the compromise. In pursuance of the direction, a report has been received from Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Zira stating that the compromise arrived at between the parties is without any pressure or coercion from any one and the same is genuine one.

4.

Learned Senior Deputy Advocate General, Punjab on instructions from the Investigating Officer and learned counsel for the complainant-respondent No.2 admit the factum of compromise and counsel for the respondent-State would 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. 5.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record.

6.

In a decision, based on compromise, none of the parties is a loser. Rather, a 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 prosecution would be an exercise in futility, as the chances of ultimate

-3conviction are bleak.

7.

Consequently, keeping in view the fact that the dispute has been amicably settled and in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Narinder Singh and others vs. State of Punjab and another, (2014) 6 SCC 466, this petition is allowed and FIR No.130 dated 25.07.2013 registered under Section 498-A, 406 of Indian Penal Code at Police Station Zira, District Ferozepur (Annexure P-1) and all subsequent proceedings arising out of the same are quashed qua petitioners. August 13, 2021 (JAISHREE THAKUR) P.Bhatt/Pankaj* JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No