Mamta Chauhan And ORS v. State Of Punjab And ORS
CRM-M No. 10566 of 2020 --1--
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M No. 10566 of 2020
Reserved on: 04-04-2022
Pronounced on: 06-04-2022 Mamta Chauhan and others ......Petitioners Vs.
State of Punjab and others ......Respondents
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA
Present:
Mr. Vivek Lamba, Advocate for the petitioners. Ms. Jaspreet Kaur, AAG, Punjab.
Mr. Ashish Sharma, Advocate for respondents No. 2 and 3. Ms. Parul Sandal, Advocate for respondent No. 4. *** ANOOP CHITKARA J.
FIR No.
Dated Police Station Sections 01.02.2020 Phase-1, Mohali 419, 420, 468, 471, 120-B IPC The petitioner(s), arraigned as accused in the above captioned FIR, has come up before this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C for quashing of the FIR and all consequential proceedings based on the compromise with the victim(s).
2.
During the pendency of the petition, the accused and the victim Chinder Kumar (R-2), and R.R. Garg (R-4) have compromised the matter, and the copies are annexed with this petition.
3.
After that, the petitioners came up before this Court to quash the FIR, and in the quashing petition, the victims have been impleaded as respondents no. 2 to 4. 4.
On 08.07.2020 Ruldu Ram Garg (R-4) and Chinder Kumar (R-2), the victims, stated before the JMIC(D)/Mohali that there would be no objection if the court quashes this FIR and consequent proceedings. As per the concerned court's report dated 10.07.2020, the parties consented to the quashing of FIR and consequent proceedings without any threat. 5.
Although the petitioners arraigned in Deepak Kansal as Respondent no. 3, yet he was not JYOTI 2022.04.08 14:24 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
CRM-M No. 10566 of 2020 --2-- examined before the concerned Magistrate. In case the Deepak Kansal was not the aggrieved person, then let the petitioner explain in the next petition. 6.
Since all the aggrieved persons 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 the parties, who already stand recorded. The copies of the statements along with report would suffice. Petition dismissed in the terms mentioned above, with liberty reserved. (ANOOP CHITKARA) JUDGE 06-04-2022 Jyoti-II Whether speaking/reasoned:
Yes Whether reportable:
No.
JYOTI 2022.04.08 14:24 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document