Makhan Singh And ORS. v. State Of Punjab & ANR

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

Criminal Misc. No.30275 of 2017 and Criminal Misc. No.M-20939 of 2017 .....

Date of decision:27.9.2017 Makhan Singh and others .....Petitioners v.

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

Coram:

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

Present:

Mr. Manish Singla, Advocate for Mr. Naresh Jain, Advocate for the petitioners.

Mr. Kuldeep Singh, Senior Deputy Advocate General, Punjab for the respondent-State.

Mr. J.S. Dhaliwal, Advocate for complainant-respondent No.2. .....

Inderjit Singh, J.

Cr. Misc. No.30275 of 2017:

For the reasons mentioned in the criminal miscellaneous application, the same is allowed and the hearing of the main petition is preponed from 6.2.2018 to today.

The criminal miscellaneous application stands disposed of. Cr. Misc. No.M-20939 of 2017:

This petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. praying for quashing of FIR No.15 dated 10.4.2012 (Annexure-P.1) registered for

Cr. Misc. No.M-20939 of 2017 [2] the offences under Sections 420 and 120-B IPC at Police Station Jhunir, District Mansa and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom in view of the compromise (Annexure-P.2).

The FIR has been registered on the statement of complainantNavneet Kumar on the allegations that the accused-petitioners by hatching conspiracy have cheated him. Now with the intervention of respectable persons, the matter has been amicably settled and compromise has been entered into between the parties, therefore, they were directed to appear before learned trial Court for getting their statements recorded in support of the compromise. After doing the needful, learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Sardulgarh has sent report dated 8.8.2017 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 Senior Deputy Advocate General, Punjab, on instructions from the Investigating Officer and learned counsel for complainant-respondent 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

Cr. Misc. No.M-20939 of 2017 [3] 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.

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.15 dated 10.4.2012 (Annexure-P.1) registered for the offences under Sections 420 and 120-B IPC at Police Station Jhunir, District Mansa and all subsequent proceedings arising out of the same are hereby quashed qua the petitioners. September 27, 2017.

(Inderjit Singh) Judge *hsp* NOTE:

Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes Whether reportable:

No