Ranjit Singh Shergill & ANR v. State Of Punjab & ANR

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

Criminal Misc. No.M-17236 of 2016 .....

Date of decision:16.11.2017 Ranjit Singh Shergill and another .....Petitioners v.

State of Punjab and another .....Respondents ....

Coram:

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

Present:

Mr. C.S. Sharma, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Rana Harjasdeep Singh, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab for the respondent-State.

Mr. Arjun Airi, Advocate for Mr. Sunil K. Tandon, Advocate for complainant-respondent No.2.

.....

Inderjit Singh, J.

This petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. praying for quashing of FIR No.227 dated 30.12.2015 (Annexure-P.1) registered for the offence under Section 380 IPC at Police Station Sadar Jalandhar, District Jalandhar City and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom in view of the compromise (Annexure-P.2).

The FIR has been registered on the statement of complainantLakhveer Singh on the allegations that the accused-petitioners in connivance with each other had stolen two cheques of the complainant and used one cheque for `22 Lakhs and presented the same in the bank, but the same was not cleared due to insufficient balance in complainant's account. Now with the intervention of respectable persons, the matter has been

Cr. Misc. No.M-17236 of 2016 [2] 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, Jalandhar has sent report dated 31.10.2017 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 complainantrespondent No.2 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 parties as well as learned State counsel 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 prosecution would be an exercise in futility, as the chances of ultimate conviction are bleak.

Cr. Misc. No.M-17236 of 2016 [3] 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.227 dated 30.12.2015 (Annexure-P.1) registered for the offence under Section 380 IPC at Police Station Sadar Jalandhar, District Jalandhar City and all subsequent proceedings arising out of the same are hereby quashed qua the petitioners. November 16, 2017.

(Inderjit Singh) Judge *hsp* NOTE:

Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes Whether reportable:

No