Vipin Gujjar And Others v. State Of Haryana And Another
CRM-M-8576-2020
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-8576-2020
Reserved on: 03.08.2022
Date of Pronouncement: 20.09.2022
Vipin Gujjar & others
...Petitioner (s)
Versus
State of Haryana & another
...Respondent(s)
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA Present:- Mr. Brijender Kaushik, Advocate for the petitioner(s).
Mr. Manish Bansal, DAG, Haryana.
Mr. Yashvinder Singh, Advocate for respondent no.2.
**** ANOOP CHITKARA, J.
FIR No.
Dated Police Station Sections 11.12.2018 Karnal City, Karnal 342, 365, 406, 420, 506, 34 IPC read with Section 25 Arms Act The petitioners, arraigned as accused in the above captioned FIR, have come up before this Court under Section 482 CrPC for quashing of the FIR and all consequential proceedings based on the compromise with the aggrieved person. 2.
During the pendency of the petition, the accused and the aggrieved person have compromised the matter, and its copy is annexed with this petition as Annexure P-2.
3.
After that, the petitioners came up before this Court to quash the FIR, and in the quashing petition, impleading the aggrieved person as respondent. ASHWANI KUMAR 2022.09.21 10:17 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment
CRM-M-8576-2020 4.
On 31.5.22, the aggrieved person Praveen Mittal (R-2) appeared before the JMIC, Karnal and stated that there would be no objection if the court quashes this FIR and consequent proceedings. As per the concerned court's report dated 8.6.22, the parties consented to the quashing of FIR and consequent proceedings without any threat.
ANALYSIS & REASONING:
5.
However, the petitioners did not arraign the other aggrieved Vikas (who is the partner of the respondent no.2) as a respondent in this case. 6.
Since all the victims did not state about their no objection to the compromise and also the reasons which led to the compromise, as such this court cannot proceed further in this matter.
7.
Given above, the petition is dismissed. However, liberty is reserved to the petitioners to file a fresh petition and there would be no necessity re-examine Praveen Mittal and the accused, whose statements stand recorded. The copies of the statements alongwith report would suffice. Petition dismissed in the terms mentioned above, with liberty reserved. (ANOOP CHITKARA) JUDGE September 20, 2022 AK Whether speaking/reasoned:
Yes Whether reportable:
No.
ASHWANI KUMAR 2022.09.21 10:17 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment