Nissan Singh And ORS v. State Of Punjab & ANR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: January 29, 2016 Nissan Singh and others

...Petitioners

Versus

State of Punjab and another

...Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARESH KUMAR SANGHI

Present:

Mr. Balbir Singh Jaswal, Advocate, for the petitioners.

Mr. P.S. Paul, DAG, Punjab, for respondent No . 1.

Ms. Sushma Sharma, Advocate, for Mr. Ramesh Sharma, Advocate, for respondent No. 2.

1.

Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

2.

To be referred to the Reporters or not?

3.

Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?

NARESH KUMAR SANGHI, J. (Oral) The present petition under Section 482, Cr.P.C., has been filed by Nissan Singh, Mohinderpal Singh, Sukhwinder Singh and Balwinder Singh @ Sonu, for quashing of FIR No. 80,

dated 20.9.2013 (Annexure P-1), for the offences punishable under Sections 148, 324, 326 and 452 read with Section 149, IPC, registered at Police Station, Khilchian, District Amritsar, and all the consequential proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise, dated 8.6.2015 (Annexure P-2).

Vide order dated 27.7.2015, the affected parties were directed to appear before the learned Trial Court, for getting their respective statements recorded with regard to the compromise. The said Court was also directed to send a detailed report in that regard to this Court. In compliance thereof, the affected parties did appear before learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Baba Bakala Sahib, District Amritsar, and got recorded their respective statements with regard to the compromise.

Respondent No. 2/informant/injured, Ramnik Singh, suffered the following statement:- "

The present case has been registered on my statement against four accused persons namely Nishan Singh, Mohinder Pal Singh, Sukhwinder Singh and Balwinder Singh.

Now the matter has been compromised with all the abovesaid accused persons with the intervention of respectable persons of the village. I have no objection if the FIR No. 80 of 2013

and subsequent proceedings arising out of said FIR registered at Police Station Khalchian are quashed by the Hn'ble High Court. I do not want to take further action against all the accused. I have made this statement out of mine own sweet will, without any threat or pressure. Compromise with accused persons have been effected out of mine own sweet will and without any kind of pressure from any one. No accused is P.O in this case ."

All the four petitioners also suffered a joint statement admitting the factum of the compromise.

The operative part of the report received from learned Court below is as under:- "

After considering their statements, the undersigned is of the opinion that said compromise has been entered into in between the petitioners/accused and complainant/respondent no. 2 voluntarily, out of their free will and without any pressure or coercion and the same appears to be genuine one. The petitioneraccused Mohinder Pal Singh furnished his sworn affidavit stating therein that except the present FIR, no other criminal case is pending or registered against any of the accused-petitioners. Further, as per record of this case, no accused is proclaimed person. ......" Learned counsel for the petitioners urged that on

account of previous enmity with regard to encroachment over a piece of land between both the private parties, the quarrel had originated and impugned FIR was registered. He further submits that due to intervention of the respectable and elderly people of the society, the matter has been resolved and the private parties have effected a compromise (Annexure P-2). At present, there remains no dispute amongst the private parties. He further submits that in view of the compromise so effected between the private parties, pendency of the impugned FIR and consequential proceedings emanating therefrom would be sheer abuse of the process of law. In support of his contention, learned counsel has placed reliance on the judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme Court delivered in the case of Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and another, 2012 (4) R.C.R. (Criminal) 543 (SC), and judgment of a 5-Judge Bench of this Court in the matter of Kulwinder Singh and others v. State of Punjab and another, 2007 (3) RCR (Criminal) 1052.

Learned counsel for the State on instructions from ASI Sikander Lal of Police Station, Khilchian, District Amritsar, and after going through the statements and the report received from learned Court below, very fairly admits that the private parties have resolved their dispute and effected a compromise. He

further submits that he has no objection if the impugned FIR and all the consequential proceedings are quashed on the basis of the compromise.

Learned counsel for respondent No. 2/ informant/injured, also admits that factum of the compromise and has no objection if the impugned FIR and all the consequential proceedings are quashed on the basis of the compromise.

After hearing learned counsel for the parties and going through the material available on record, this Court also finds that pendency of the present criminal litigation would be abuse of process of law since the chances of conviction of the petitioners are bleak in view of the compromise so effected between the private parties.

The report alongwith statements of the affected parties received from learned Court below would reveal that respondent No. 2/informant/injured has genuinely effected a compromise with the petitioners and he has no objection if the impugned FIR and consequential proceedings are quashed. Keeping in view totality of the facts and circumstances of the case and taking into consideration the ratio of the judgments in the cases of Gian Singh (supra) and

Kulwinder Singh (supra), this petition is accepted and FIR No. 80, dated 20.9.2013 (Annexure P-1), for the offences punishable under Sections 148, 324, 326 and 452 read with Section 149, IPC, registered at Police Station, Khilchian, District Amritsar, and all the consequential proceedings arising therefrom are hereby quashed.

(NARESH KUMAR SANGHI) JUDGE January 29, 2016 Pkapoor