Kuljeet Singh Kochhar And Others v. State Of Haryana And Others
CRM-M No. 14800 of 2022 --1--
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-14800-2022
Reserved on: 09.05.2022
Pronounced on: 21.07.2022 Kuljeet Singh Kochhar and others ......... Petitioners
Versus
State of Haryana and others ......... Respondents
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA Present:- Mr. Ranjit Saini, Advocate for the petitioners.
Mr. Manish Bansal, D.A.G, Haryana.
Mr. Krishan Singh, Advocate for respondents No. 2 to 21.
**** ANOOP CHITKARA, J. (ORAL) FIR No.
Dated Police Station Sections 29.03.2016 Ambala City, 406, 420, 467, 468, 471, District Ambala 120-B IPC 1.
The parties had settled the entire disputes vide a settlement/compromise deed dated 28.02.2019. The said settlement had taken place with the intervention of mediator. Apart from the payment of the alleged amount, it was also agreed that in case of any breach of the conditions of the settlement, the second party/complainant would be at liberty to revive the FIR. Despite such a long time being passed, the second party has not sought for reviving of the FIR, rather on the other hand has supported its quashing. 2.
A perusal of the compromise deed also reveals that the victim/aggrieved party are signatory to the same. Apart from that affidavits of Prema, Neelam Rani and Vipula Bansal have also been handed over by learned counsel for the parties. 3.
During the course of the arguments, learned counsel for the parties have amended their petition by submitting that they would be confining that the aggrieved persons are not all the respondents as well originally mentioned in the petition and now as per the JYOTI 2022.07.28 11:45 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
CRM-M No. 14800 of 2022 --2-- amended memo of parties, a number of respondents have been reduced to 18. Such amended memo dated 25.04.2020 is also taken on record. 4.
Given above, the civil litigation being settled with the intervention and help of mediation centre and further that learned counsel for the parties explicitly supported the quashing of the FIR, there is no reason for this Court to continue sit over the same, consequently, aforesaid FIR is quashed with all consequential proceedings. Petition allowed in aforesaid terms. All pending applications, if any, stand disposed. (ANOOP CHITKARA) JUDGE 21.07.2022 Jyoti-II Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No JYOTI 2022.07.28 11:45 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document