Santosh Kumari Alias Neetu v. State Of Punjab And Another

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-10149-2025 Date of decision: May 14th, 2025 Santosh Kumari @ Neetu .....Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab and others .....Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANJARI NEHRU KAUL

Present:

Mr. R.S. Waraich, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Gautam Thapar, Senior Deputy Advocate General, Punjab.

Ms. Pawandeep Kaur, Advocate for respondent No.2.

MANJARI NEHRU KAUL, J. (ORAL) The instant petition is for quashing of FIR No.50 dated 30.08.2024 under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 registered at Police Station Mehal Kalan, District Barnala, and the consequential proceedings arising out of the same, on the basis of compromise (Annexure P-2) arrived at, between the parties. 2.

Ms. Pawandeep Kaur, Advocate, for Mr. M.S. Rana, Advocate, has entered appearance on behalf of respondent No.3 and filed power of attorney, which is taken on record. She submits that respondent No.3 would have no objection if the FIR qua the accusedpetitioner is quashed. 3.

Vide order dated 21.02.2025 of this Court, the parties were directed to appear before the learned trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate on 04.03.2025 to get their statements recorded regarding the compromise PUNEET SACHDEVA 2025.05.14 17:31 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

CRM-M-10149-2025 -2arrived at, between them.

4.

Report has since been received from learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Barnala, in pursuance of the directions of this Court, wherein, the factum of the compromise arrived at between the parties stands verified and confirmed. As per the report compromise has indeed been effected between the parties and the same is without any pressure or coercion and out of their free will and the complainant has also made statement to the effect that he would have no objection if the FIR qua the accused-petitioner is quashed. 5.

The trial Court has annexed the statements of the parties in original, along with its report.

6.

Learned State counsel too submits that there are no other accused other than the petitioner and the private respondents are the only aggrieved persons in the FIR in question. 7.

In view of the report of the learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Barnala, and the principles laid down by Hon'ble the Apex Court in Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab and others (2012) 10 SCC 303, and also by the Full Bench of this Court in Kulwinder Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab and another, 2007(3) RCR (Criminal) 1052, the instant petition is allowed. The aforesaid FIR and all consequential proceedings arising out of it, are quashed.

8.

Needless to say the parties shall remain bound by the terms of compromise and their statements recorded before the Court below. May 14th, 2025 (MANJARI NEHRU KAUL) Puneet JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether reportable :

Yes/No PUNEET SACHDEVA 2025.05.14 17:31 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh