Sathu @ Mohammad Ali And ORS. v. State Of Punjab And ORS.

CRM-M-23765-2018 -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No. M-23765 of 2018 (O&M) Date of decision: September 12, 2019 Sathu @ Mohammad Ali and others .. Petitioners

Versus

State of Punjab and others .. Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURINDER GUPTA

Present:

Ms. Kuldeep Kaur, Advocate for Mr. Amit Arora, Advocate for the petitioners.

Mr. Avtar Singh Sandhu, Addl. A.G., Punjab.

Mr. Jagjeet Singh, Advocate for Mr. P.S.Kanwar, Advocate for the complainant.

SURINDER GUPTA, J.(Oral) The petitioners have filed this petition under Section 482 Code of Criminal Procedure (for short, 'Cr.P.C.') seeking quashing of FIR No. 67 dated 07.03.2018 (Annexure P-1) along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, registered for offences punishable under Sections 365, 323, 148 read with Section 149 of Indian Penal Code (for short 'IPC') at Police Station City Tarn Taran, District Tarn Taran on the basis of the compromise (Annexure P-2).

As per allegations in the FIR, the petitioners gave injuries to Najeer and when complainant-Sadik and Babu intervened, they were also given fist blows. Thereafter, they picked Najeer and took him away in Alto car.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the matter has since been amicably settled vide compromise, copy of which has been JYOTI 2019.09.16 10:54 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CRM-M-23765-2018 -2placed on file as Annexure P-2.

Learned counsel for respondent No.2-complainant and other private respondents endorse the submission of learned counsel for the petitioners and has no objection if the impugned FIR (Annexure P-1) is quashed.

Learned State counsel has also not disputed compromise (Annexure P-2).

In order to verify the veracity and genuineness of the settlement between the parties, they were directed to appear before the trial court and get their statements recorded. The trial court has sent its report dated 21.05.2019 stating therein that the compromise has been effected between the complainant and the accused which appears to be voluntary in nature and without any pressure or influence.

Keeping all the above facts in view, I am of the considered opinion that it is a fit case in which the impugned FIR should be quashed. Keeping the case pending will not serve the ends of justice. The quashing of the FIR will provide the parties to this petition an opportunity to live in an amicable, peaceful and harmonious atmosphere which is not only in the interest of the parties but also for their families and ultimately the society at large.

For the reasons as discussed above, the instant petition is allowed and the FIR No. 67 dated 07.03.2018 (Annexure P-1) along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, qua petitioners, is quashed. September 12, 2019 (SURINDER GUPTA) Jyoti-II JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether Reportable:

Yes/No JYOTI 2019.09.16 10:54 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document