Manjit Singh And ORS. v. State Of Punjab & ORS

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

Criminal Misc. No.M-23281 of 2016 .....

Date of decision:6.3.2017 Manjit Singh and others .....Petitioners v.

State of Punjab and others .....Respondents ....

Coram:

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

Present:

Mr. Ramesh Sharma, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. J.S. Bhullar, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab for the respondent-State.

Mr. B.S. Jaswal, Advocate for complainant-respondents No.2 and 3.

.....

Inderjit Singh, J.

This petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. praying for quashing of cross-case registered vide Diary No.17 dated 3.6.2016 (Annexure-P.1) for the offences under Sections 326, 324 and 34 IPC in FIR No.93 dated 30.5.2016 registered for the offences under Sections 326, 323, 324, 148 and 149 IPC at Police Station Kambo, District Amritsar (Rural) and all subsequent proceedings arising therefrom in view of the compromise (Annexure-P.3).

The cross case Diary No.17 in FIR has been registered on the statement of complainant-Ravinder Singh alias Rinku on the allegations that the accused-petitioners attacked him and respondent No.3 and inflicted

Cr. Misc. No.M-23281 of 2016 [2] injuries. Now with the intervention of respectable persons, the matter has been 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 Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Amritsar has sent report dated 23.11.2016 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 complainantrespondents No.2 and 3 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 cross-case DDR No.17 in 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 Assistant Advocate General, Punjab 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

Cr. Misc. No.M-23281 of 2016 [3] 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 cross-case registered vide Diary No.17 dated 3.6.2016 (Annexure-P.1) for the offences under Sections 326, 324 and 34 IPC in FIR No.93 dated 30.5.2016 registered for the offences under Sections 326, 323, 324, 148 and 149 IPC at Police Station Kambo, District Amritsar (Rural) and all subsequent proceedings arising out of the same are hereby quashed qua the petitioners.

March 6, 2017.

(Inderjit Singh) Judge *hsp* NOTE:

Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes Whether reportable:

No